It isn’t just cops it is all the various people and orgs in the ecosystem who are all convinced they aren’t the internet police.
--srs ________________________________ From: Michael Thomas via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2025 7:46:01 AM To: nanog@lists.nanog.org <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Cc: Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> Subject: Re: Worsening google service reputation and abuse On 8/17/25 5:15 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian via NANOG wrote: > Real economics as a factor has been studied quite a lot - check for papers by > Vern Paxson, Stefan Savage etc and you’ll find some going back 20+ years. > > A lot of the real economic impact just doesn’t lie in technical solutions > though. There is a lot of damage done for tons of things. Yet, Visa still exists. Fraud exists. It's a cost of doing business. It's just petty crime. Nothing is going to stop it. That is what the joke is. The cops don't give a flying fuck about this, and never will. They don't care about anything if it doesn't involve donuts. Mike > > From: Marc Binderberger via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> > Date: Sunday, 17 August 2025 at 5:37 PM > To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog@lists.nanog.org> > Cc: Marc Binderberger <marc+li...@sniff.es> > Subject: Re: Worsening google service reputation and abuse > > > On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 17:24:04 -0700, Michael Thomas via NANOG wrote: > >> Barry has been going on about this idea for decades, I think. It wouldn't >> work then, it won't work now. > Until some idea suddenly works. Or an old idea becomes feasible. > > Frankly, many things we take for granted today would not exist with that > "won't work" attitude. The better question (imho) to Barry is: how is your > idea different from the already existing proposals? > > Barry has a reasonable theory - that the economics of spamming is brittle - > but it is just that: a theory. > > And most of the (failed) proposals seem academic and avoid actual "costs" in > terms of money. Or raise the real-world costs for everyone, if you need CPU > cycles to participate in the email system. So Barry stepping out of this box > and suggesting real economics as a factor is not unreasonable. I am not sure > if there are more concrete details though (?). > > >> Nobody can put up a coherent argument for why >> the current cat and mouse situation isn't the acceptable balance, > I guess "acceptable" can be defined as: Hey, I can always get a free personal > account with gmail. And as a company I pay Google or Microsoft, save money on > my IT staff. And good luck blocking "me" (i.e. Google, Microsoft). > > Maybe a problem if you are in the email business, fine with me, my domain is > a private hobby. In fact, for all their "flaws", seeing the insanity of the > know-it-all experts (some here on the list) I think I prefer Google > requesting some reputation steps and a webpage explaining it. The > alternative: being blocked for "Excessive Spam - Come back when you have > fixed it". No further details. Sure, private domain, private VPS, no BL/score > listing that I can find ... fortunately that blocking was just a Cc: to one > of my posts, so I could not care less. The acceptable state of the mail > system today! > > So there you may have an argument: that the increasing number of mechanisms, > lists, tricks make the mail system less work-able and more broken. But I have > no crystal ball, if email will finally break or will keep going - I don't > know. Would be just sad if it breaks (but I have a gmail account as a backup > ;-) > > Marc > > > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/SAZSIVJFOO2HJX4JPDFXXZZBLT3ZBKQ5/ > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/DCKS64CINBGHI7M5I6IHMJ7NVCJLTBLG/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/G7FDDNH3JPETIG2UGUL34POYPDO2BDGR/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/Z54AAQL64TAPICROM3UEYHCOD73FQTWV/
