a bit of lovely news about spam in California

[David Wolfskill]

>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 07:59:41 -0800 (PST)
>From: "Michael J. Miller Jr." <mke at turbolift.com>

>One possible solution that occurs to me is to start a second email 
>infrastructure that would eventually replace the first....

>All very expensive of course.  The question is, would this be more expensive
>then the current and future cost of SPAM?  If the answer is yes, then we 
>should all just get used to SPAM and the never ending escalation between 
>spammers and those who try stop/slow them down.  If it isn't more expensive, 
>than what are people waiting for?  :-)

As you know, there are both "one-time" and "ongoing" expenses to most
expenditures, and this is a case where the one-time expenses are
considerable.  (The ongoing ones could be significant, as well, of
course.)

It is not clear to me that this is the only way to go.  :-}

Cheers,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill				david at catwhisker.org
I believe it would be irresponsible (and thus, unethical) for me to advise,
recommend, or support the use of any product that is or depends on any
Microsoft product for any purpose other than personal amusement.