Bill Gates is thinking of e-mail tax

The Mullinator

The Mullinator

Newbie
Joined
May 24, 2003
Messages
5,794
Reaction score
0
Heres another reason I can hate Bill Gates for. Hes thinking about forcing people to pay for every e-mail they send to anyone as a way to stop spam. Ok so it will stop spam but im sure as hell not paying any amount of money to send e-mails no matter how cheap it is.

The thing that really burns me up is that you can probably take a pretty good guess as to who would collect the money.

Heres an article:
http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5151925.html?tag=nefd_top
 
HOLY SHIT MOTHER****ER!!!!
He's not getting my money.
If the guy charges for e-mails, there won't be any sapm anyway b/c no one will use it anymore.

edit- read it all. Seems like Private individuals can send, only companies can't.
Maybe IT IS good idea.
 
I wouldn't mind paying about 3 cents an e-mail if it went to a charity or something. But that's not going to happen so I think we should just keep e-mail free.
 
don't like the idea but if it stops those hundreds and thousands of spam messages then *shrugs*


on an unrelated note, i just stepped on a huge mother****ing spider on the way to the kitchen...mmmm, squishy...
 
What about newsletters that you request. Munro sometimes sends out mass e-mails to members of this website. That would be just another added cost to running the website.
 
I've been saying they should do this at the ISP for over five years now. It would be very simple and act as a major profit center for business ISPs.

You already have metered accounts (bandwidth, NNTP usage) and you don't mind, so why not meter e-mail. The standard account could have a monthly postage allotment of say 100 emails SENT- average 3+ a day. You'd have to pay for more than that or wait till the end of the month. Email servers could give priority to registered servers participating in the plan. Email readers could prioritize incoming mail as "First class" vs bulk (free).

The SMTP standard (Bill doesn't like that word) needs to be updated to provide authenticity, encryption, delivery controls, and prevent anonymous mail.
 
IMO it is a good idea, but I don't wanna do it. Plus, I like Bill Gates. He's donated tons of money to many charities. I don't see why people hate him because of Windows, since you don't hafta use Windows and anything else on it.
 
RoyalEF said:
I've been saying they should do this at the ISP for over five years now. It would be very simple and act as a major profit center for business ISPs.

You already have metered accounts (bandwidth, NNTP usage) and you don't mind, so why not meter e-mail. The standard account could have a monthly postage allotment of say 100 emails SENT- average 3+ a day. You'd have to pay for more than that or wait till the end of the month. Email servers could give priority to registered servers participating in the plan. Email readers could prioritize incoming mail as "First class" vs bulk (free).

The SMTP standard (Bill doesn't like that word) needs to be updated to provide authenticity, encryption, delivery controls, and prevent anonymous mail.
Click to expand...
But I do mind about having metered bandwidth usage. Also it is extremelly difficult for ISP's to implement such a system. If it was that easy for them to track down all those bulk e-mail senders then we wouldn't even have the current problem right now because they could easily shut them down.
 
so another reason added to that long list of reasons why pple hate Billy..

hmm.. anyone remember that Poseyjmac guy from the Linux vs Windows threads? heh
i wonder what he would have to see about this.. :upstare:
 
Yeah,
Bill stole to make his $$$ so him giveing dirty $$$$ away really does not justify what he did.
 
uberneko said:
IMO it is a good idea, but I don't wanna do it. Plus, I like Bill Gates. He's donated tons of money to many charities. I don't see why people hate him because of Windows, since you don't hafta use Windows and anything else on it.
Click to expand...
Almost every major corporation gives money to charity, for them its a way of advertising their supposed "soft side".

And what do you mean we don't have to use Windows? To play the majority of games out their (including Half Life 2) I am forced to use windows, to use alot of graphics editing, or sound editing tools that have alot of support I am forced to use windows.
 
For diretX games its better to play them in windows.
I use wine X for direct X games in linux but not all games work very well with wine. :( Open GL games like UT2003 and Quake III, RTCW, UT, Searous Sam I and II work great in linux. :)
 
I don't see how simply making companies pay for email will stop spam... They all pretend to be from individuals who've "seen this really great site" and it would be hard to prove a company did it... It wont stop spam atall.

And what about people sending through other email servers, you could risk ending up paying for thousands of emails sent supposedly from you

meh its silly
 
Ive read about this in another article somewhere around 2 weeks ago. The article went into great detail about the system Bill wanted to implement and i believe its a great idea. Basically you would pay for the equivalent of a postage stamp and when the recipient of the email recieved it they would vet the mail to see wether it would be classified as spam or not. If they okay'd the mail then the sender would be refunded the price of sending the mail. If the recipient rejected the mail as spam then sender would lose the toll. This way only those who send unwanted mail would be forced to pay.
 
I think that I could stand something like a licence for home, small buisness, medium buisness, and large buisness, or something like that, where for home you pay a buck a month ($12/year) and you can send like 20 emails a day (debatable), small b you pay $30/year and you can send 250 email a day (debatable), medium b is $120/year with a 600 email a day limit, and a large buisness pays $300 with a send ceiling of 2000 emails a day. This way their will still be spam, but not as frequently.
 
Let me enter this into my new novel...

"Glorified idiots and their ways to make everyone's life a living hell."
 
Billy Boy, is greedy, thats just how it is. "Pay For Email" Laughs Out loud!!!
 
So, having regular people (or people that are sending requested information, like newsletters) spend little to no money and putting an end to spam (or at least most of it) is stupid? I'm confused.

These plans would force companies to market products toward people that might actually be interested in them or risk losing money. I would rather get a couple of PC/gaming related product ads in my inbox instead of the 20-50 e-mails (mostly trying to get me to buy a porn membership, viagra substitutes, penis enlarging pills, etc) clogging my inbox every day. Also, it would significantly cut down on the bandwidth used by major ISPs... which would lead to either better service or lower prices. Spam makes me either change my e-mail address frequently or spend extra time sifting through a bunch of crap, neither of which are things I want to do... and anything that stops spam (especially without harming legitimate businesses and normal everyday use) deserves to be at least considered.
 
hmm i think companies give so freely to charities because you get tax benefits. (not saying that's the purpose behind all companies giving money, but a lot or most do that.) hmm however, the end result is good... being, more money to charities = good so eh, doesn't matter.
 
whhhhyyyy is charity being included into this conversation it doesnt have anything to do with taxing email... which i think is a great idea. imagine each spammer having to play 3-5 cents an email (which i wouldent mind paying for normal use) to all the millions of people he would send it too. yeah thats a bitchin bill for him.

and everyone thinks hes hella greedy just because he's rich and is looking for ways to have his company get more wealth. i dont think anyone realizes that 1) bill gates doesnt officially work for MS anymore and 2) not every dime that goes to MS goes to him. he just happens to own al ot of stocks with them. its not like he has 60 billion dollars in his wallet, its all diversified in stocks.

seems you guys are greedy. I DONT WANT TO GIVE MY 2 CENTS TO SEND AN EMAIL, WHICH STILL IS INFINATELY CHEAPER THAN SNAIL MAIL. dumbasses.
 
why not find another way of stopping spam... or is it too much money for them to invest in a solution.. :rolling:
 
or maybe its more difficult than you think...
 
meh,, maybe , but they can program anything these days, why piss people off with tax (more profit for them I guess. :P greedy son of a ....)
 
i think we should all be taxed on many inches our turds are....
:x


ffs......this is funny stuff... :eek:
 
The reason people should be charged (it's not a tax, it is payment for a service) per e-mail (not all, just what is deemed by the receiver as "spam") is that spam wastes bandwidth, costs ISPs money, and diverts the ISP's resources to developing anti-spam measures.

In the system I favor, you are only charged if the receiver marks your message as spam. It would not have any effect on casual users sending e-mails to friends. People that run newsletters would probably not be charged either since the people are not likely to mark it as spam (because they requested it). The only people hurt by that system are the ones that we are trying to keep from spamming. Sure, you might have to pay a couple of pennies if you piss off one of your friends before you send them an e-mail... but that's your own fault.

Think of ISPs as the USPS. If you were a postal worker would you like having to deliver millions of unsolicited letters that didn't even pay postage (and end up going straight to the trash) every day? No, because it would waste the USPS's resources, costing them money at no cost to the people sending the unwanted mail. Right now that's exactly the way it is with e-mail.

Also, the new system would (in addition to drastically cutting down on spam) make e-mail much more secure and verifiable. Right now I can make an e-mail look like it came from any address I want. What they are proposing would take measures to prevent this and allow you to verify that it came from who it says.
 
Ooh, email tax! You know what, let's charge for messageboard posts as well! It will still be infinitely cheaper than snail mail!!!1 No more trolling and spamming!! Free = bad! Tax = good!



:dozey:
 
What a load of bull, yeah go ahead pass these bill's in the US but what stops a sever in a more legal loose company sending email.
Or will they just suddently get Igor to throw the big port blocking switch.
This is hugely bad for ecommerce, they would have more sense to promote secure certificates which validate email.
 
Here in finland only companies pay per bandwith, regular users only pay per month, or if some stupid people still are using modems that cost per minute...
 
You've all ignored wtf i said about the tax!!! The ordinary email user wouldnt have to pay!! Only the Spam mailer who gets thier mails rejected as spam will have to pay!
Gates said Microsoft, where he has the title of chief software designer, is working on a solution based on the concept of "proof," or identifying the sender of the e-mail.

One method involves a human challenge, or requiring the sender of an electronic pitch to solve a puzzle that only a flesh-and-blood person can handle. Another is a so-called "computational puzzle" that a computer sending only a few messages could easily handle, but that would be prohibitively expensive for a mass-mailer.

But the most promising, Gates said, was a method that would hit the sender of an e-mail in the pocketbook.

People would set a level of monetary risk - low or high, depending on their choice - for receiving e-mail from strangers. If the e-mail turns out to be from a long-lost relative, for example, the recipient would charge nothing. But if it is unwanted spam, the sender would have to fork over the cash.
Click to expand...
 
erm to be honest spam doesnt really bother me that much at all, tax would....so really theres no point
 
With the tax idea mass mailing from forums would be too riskey.. what if many members said that it was spam? then munro would get enormous bills....
 
I think that any sort of company should have to use stamps, not private users
 
If someone identifies your newsletter as spam once then you just remove them from the mailing list. If they want back on it you tell them to pay the amount you got charged (and a little more as insurance that they won't do it again).
 
erm sounds stupid to me, what if loads of people do that but dont ask to be moved back onto the mailing list..... its unfair
 
Paying for emails would....in one word.... suck!
 
you dont pay for email...ughhh dumbasses, read the damn thread before you respond to the title.
 
Gh0st, Bill Gates is lead software designer for microsoft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

nofreeman
Army developing "synthetic telepathy
Replies
18
Views
1K
CrazyHarij
CrazyHarij
Warped
Students launch camera to edge of space
Replies
20
Views
1K
AmishSlayer
AmishSlayer
N
Religious Police(Mutaween) in... Sweden?!
Replies
29
Views
3K
Nemesis6
N
S
Finally building my pc tommorow. I have a couple of questions now.
Replies
2
Views
775
Sgt.Igneri
S
Back
Top