I'm curious who you think is the internet police.
On 18 August 2025 04:18:18 CEST, Suresh Ramasubramanian via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote: >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 <[email protected]> >Sent: Monday, August 18, 2025 7:46:01 AM >To: [email protected] <[email protected]> >Cc: Michael Thomas <[email protected]> >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 <[email protected]> >> Date: Sunday, 17 August 2025 at 5:37 PM >> To: North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]> >> Cc: Marc Binderberger <[email protected]> >> 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/[email protected]/message/SAZSIVJFOO2HJX4JPDFXXZZBLT3ZBKQ5/ >> _______________________________________________ >> NANOG mailing list >> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/DCKS64CINBGHI7M5I6IHMJ7NVCJLTBLG/ >_______________________________________________ >NANOG mailing list >https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/G7FDDNH3JPETIG2UGUL34POYPDO2BDGR/ >_______________________________________________ >NANOG mailing list >https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/Z54AAQL64TAPICROM3UEYHCOD73FQTWV/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/BZZGCBIOZIY6GBZHNDYOOUEZT66POZ5K/
