Why does this group have so much spam?

[David]

Il Sun, 30 Aug 2009 19:13:38 +0100, Nobody ha scritto:

> Apart from the impossibility of implementing such a tax, it isn't going to
> discourage spammers when the tax will be paid by the owner of the
> compromised PC from which they're sending their spam.

I don't agree.
Each computer connected to internet is phisically connected to a carrer's
hub. Each carrier can easily count smtp packets of each user as they can
detect, filter and in some nations prosecute, p2p users.

The owner of compromised PC should be responsible of his computer like the
owner of a car is responsible of damages caused by its car. 
That owner should keep his computer clean as he *must* keep his car
functional and safe. 
Today most of the people consider cyber security an optional, but all of us
pay for their negligence. Those people are externalizing to the rest of the
world their costs in terms of SO updating, antivirus, firewall and
knowledge. This is unfair.
This is mainly a matter of sensibility and culture: in '50/60s active and
passive car safety was an optional, today is a must.
I think it's time to switch to responsible computing and the mail-tax would
charge each person of its own costs and annoyances without affectig the rest
of the world.

> 
> If you want to avoid usenet spam and don't want to filter it yourself,
> find a provider with more aggressive spam filter. 

This is not the solution. You are saying that if your neighbour makes loud
noises you can not call police to impose him to cease but you can only make
your home soundproof.

> Ultimately, it's up to
> the person running the news server as to which posts they will or will not
> accept.

Are you suggesting to moderate every news server and mail server all over
the world? THIS is impossible!

D.