3 ms·
I don't understand why we don't have a system whereby all e-mail clients automatically attach a $0.001 stamp to each and every email they send (obviously a sign
by jussij 7y ago
I don't understand why we don't have a system whereby all e-mail clients automatically attach a $0.001 stamp to each and every email they send (obviously a sign in feature).
Then the e-mail readers receiving e-mails could easily filter all e-mails based on the absence/presence of that stamp.
At that cost 1000 emails would cost about $1.00 which would be a years worth of e-mails for a typical user.
For a million a day e-mail spammer that cost would quickly run them out of business.
- tyingq 7y agoThere are, of course, legitimate reasons to send lots of email. You run these people out of business too.
- rgejman 7y agoEmails from a stamped individual could be "whitelisted" so as to no longer require a stamp to show up in your inbox. For instance, the first time you get an email from Amazon Prime (which they pay $0.001 cent to send), a box shows up saying "add this email to a whitelist so they don't have to spend money emailing you?"
- syrrim 7y agoAs long as you earn more than a tenth of a cent for every email you send, you'll be fine. I don't think it's unfair to classify anything else as spam.
- boomlinde 7y agoIt's not spam if it earns you money? That seems like an arbitrary distinction.