51–60 of 70 posts
...or you could just mark your spam as such and block the sender to reduce future junk mail without ruining a nice system of essentially free global communication for everyone who uses it as such.
It seems like the point of this is to reduce junk mail by forcing a financial cost to sending mail thereby causing the sender to really consider the content of their message before sending it—except there is a real cost associated with sending traditional mail and there is still a huge amount of garbage traditional mail sent out every day. Maybe I’m missing the point, though?
There is really not that much junk mail in the traditional mail, in my experience. Probably it varies place to place, but it's much MUCH less than what I get in my gmail.
* An overstuffed mailbox tells burglars you're away
* There's more waste involved - it mostly goes to landfill (unopened)
* An overstuffed mailbox leaves less room for legit mail (most email services are good at creating a focused mailbox, so there's not the same signal to noise issue there)
* ID theft is probably easier from intercepting a preapproved credit card application than being able to hack your email password
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> While (very much in theory), a few cents won't deter the casual emailer. Better yet. Require proof of work where the receiver sets the challenge level. Now you can whitelist people by offering trivial challenges for them. If you really want to email me it's going to take 2 minutes of CPU time - this will be done by the new mail clients in the background, so individual personal cost is essentially zero but bulk mai…
That's where we got the idea of proof-of-work in the 90s [1]. The problem is that this makes legitimate use cases like mailing lists very expensive, while providing little protection against spam from botnets. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash
It seems like the point of this is to reduce junk mail by forcing a financial cost to sending mail thereby causing the sender to really consider the content of their message before sending it—except there is a real cost associated with sending traditional mail and there is still a huge amount of garbage traditional mail sent out every day. Maybe I’m missing the point, though?
But mail is always priced at a fixed rate. What if your inbox worked on a bonding curve, such that as it filled up it became more expensive to send to (except for whitelisted addresses you approve)? What if your inbox required that the sender owned a particular NFT (proof of membership in a community)? I mean there are infinite rules to play with in that sense. That's what excites me about crypto.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> While (very much in theory), a few cents won't deter the casual emailer. Better yet. Require proof of work where the receiver sets the challenge level. Now you can whitelist people by offering trivial challenges for them. If you really want to email me it's going to take 2 minutes of CPU time - this will be done by the new mail clients in the background, so individual personal cost is essentially zero but bulk mai…
Don't take this the wrong way but... Oh great. Just as the environmental tire fire that is bitcoin and the other crypto-currency bros is winding down, let's replace it with email.
It would come down to numbers of course on whether it was actually a good idea, and one of those numbers would have to be "how much work needs to be done before your average spam calling scammer is no longer profitable", but as it stands if there is a number sufficient for that that still allows for regular emails, then the incentive to burn machine time on sending out mass-emails is effectively removed.
Not sure if its a good idea, Email servers get hacked daily, If you’re auto-sending payment to receiver , now there is an incentive for hackers , to spam themselves with your inbox and you pay out of your wallet for that. Now, yes one could say, that’s no problem just have a multi-wallet approval method , so unless the second one approves, it wont. But now that makes it a bit more complex, especially for newsletters…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But mail is always priced at a fixed rate. What if your inbox worked on a bonding curve, such that as it filled up it became more expensive to send to (except for whitelisted addresses you approve)? What if your inbox required that the sender owned a particular NFT (proof of membership in a community)? I mean there are infinite rules to play with in that sense. That's what excites me about crypto.
What if you just click "spam" for the 1:10000 mails that make it through the filter and moved on with your day?
Its pretty clear they also like to think about math, so you can probably answer why they don't 'just' do the thing you're asking yourself.
Not sure if its a good idea, Email servers get hacked daily, If you’re auto-sending payment to receiver , now there is an incentive for hackers , to spam themselves with your inbox and you pay out of your wallet for that. Now, yes one could say, that’s no problem just have a multi-wallet approval method , so unless the second one approves, it wont. But now that makes it a bit more complex, especially for newsletters…
Just don't sign up to mailing lists you don't like, or learn how to use temp email addresses and/or email+filter variables
It seems like the point of this is to reduce junk mail by forcing a financial cost to sending mail thereby causing the sender to really consider the content of their message before sending it—except there is a real cost associated with sending traditional mail and there is still a huge amount of garbage traditional mail sent out every day. Maybe I’m missing the point, though?
By doing this, you'll encourage the commercialization of email. The people who can fund sending email will be the ones who send email.
Frankly, I don't think email is broken, as is. It is very easy to subscribe and unsubscribe to email lists, and spam filtering generally works. It is relatively easy to control one's inbox, and it is completely under your control, as opposed to the many other services that have tried to replace it.