What is Digg?98 Comments
- trghpy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+92What a pointless title. We've had more spam than legit email since at least late 90's.
Before I used thunderbird's spam filter; I used the draconian method of reject everything but those on my address list. It worked well enough that nothing important ever got lost. - Tenlow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29I read the title and thought "you mean that isn't already true?"
- mspencer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+292007 will also have more CAPS and EXCLAMATION POINTS than well-written sentences!!!!!!!!!!!!
- unibomber999, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Spam has comprised 90% of our connections since we put in our anti-spam smtp gateway a couple of years ago. The vast majority get caught by anti-spam engines and reputation filtering, although embedded jpeg spam was a problem for a while.
More spam than human emails has been a reality for quite a while. - thatdood, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14thats soo 2004
- Wonderkind, on 10/12/2007, -8/+19With Thunderbird & Firefox, I get no spam at all. None. Zero.
I use a few add-ons and extensions and they block a lot of web-ads as well.
I "marked as junk" several spam e-mails about a year ago, and now there are none.
I get loads of crap in my snail-mail box. The stuff in my Sunday paper weighs more than the news.
I'm not taking any credit, or dissing any other programs like Opera Mail or even Outlook,
but my experience is far different than what this article cries out about, thanks to Mozilla. - vs292, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I think you mean: in 2007 the SUN will be BRIGHT!!!!!!!!!
- angusm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10@ whaambulance
You wrote: "You not getting spam in your thunderbird mailbox has little to do with Mozilla. Don't thank them for reducing your spam ... The mail client itself does very little aside from remembering certain addresses you mark as spam ..."
Wrong. Thunderbird has statistical filters that can recognize certain message characteristics. When you mark a message as junk or not junk, you're training those filters. The more training you give them, the better they perform, moving mail automatically out of your inbox and into your junk folder. Thunderbird does much more than just "remember certain addresses", making it highly effective even against novel spam.
The techniques for doing this are well-understood, but Mozilla did a good job on the implementation and the filters work well. Without them, my mailbox would be clogged to the point of unusability. - catalysis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@wonderkind
Yeah, I'm wondering when they are going to address the problem of friggin spam in my real mailbox. I can easily filter and sort email, but finding real mail in my snail-mail box is like looking for a needle in a hay stack. - Sheaf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I'll follow my email client's example and mark this as spam simply because of the capitalization in the title.
- gharding, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I think we just need to go after the douchebags that refinance their home using a company that randomly sent them a misspelled email. If you cut off the money, spammers would just stop. (Err.. this wasn't supposed to be in a reply to the first post)
- ipodsweatshop, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6This has been true for years, so what?
IN 2007 THERE WILL BE MORE JUNK MAIL THAN REAL MAIL!!!
Just like every other year, but that's how the post office makes money. Spam just costs everyone money. - geekchic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Yes.
Think about it. You are an office worker protected behind firewalls etc and never see "spams". Suddenly, one slips through offering you cheap viagra. Well, you've never seen this sort of message before, but you do see a lot of legit emails. What are you going to think?
Not everyone is as tech-savy as the average Digger. - SimianSamurai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Wait... so all those articles I read last year about how spam makes up 80% of American emails was a lie? Didn't I read that on Digg?
- screensnot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@msikma
It almost defeats the purpose of a spam filter, if you still have to look thru your spam folder to find real email. - maks327, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4am I the only one that is surprised if this is not the case already? Of COURSE there's more spam emails! A computer can spit them out by the thousands, whereas there generally needs to be a person thinking through each real email.
- rrobster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I get no spam. Now go see my blog at:
http://www.dvorak.org/blog
*/sarcasm/* - krets, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Yeah, isn't this already happening? With the amount of spam that ends up in my junk mail folder no matter how careful I am with my email address, I would imagine the normal user gets tons.
- haggie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4zero spam received this year. thanks google!
- yikiad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4In other news, The Sun Is Bright
- cliffzdude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3In the enterprise spam control is a measure of spam passed vs. false positives. There is no difinitive way to have one without the other being impacted.
That said, as we've closed down tighter and tighter on our spam filters our users have been slowly learning how to white list particular email addresses.
Coming soon, white list only email. - tdogg241, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I received ~350 actual e-mails in the last 30 days and my spam folder has almost 900 e-mails, so this is definitely the case and it has been as long as I've had my gmail account. And I've been pretty careful with who I give it out to.
- richi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Reading between the lines of IDC's press release, it seems to me that we're comparing apples with oranges. I think Mark is including the number of legitimate messages that stay inside an organization.
This is typically a whole lot more than the amount that comes in from outside. It might easily double the number of messages a user receives.
More at http://www.richi.co.uk/ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3we should re-institute public humiliation as a punishment and give that to spammers. like, tie them to a pedestal high above new york city and allow everyone to throw goo at them.
- adila01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3GMail spam filtering technology is my perferred choice. I rarely ever get have one that actually gets through. Those emails that do get through make so little sense that figuring out what they are selling becomes an extreme hassle.
- jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3We can change that. What is your email?
- dogstar0125, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Spam filters are a band-aid solution. Why should the whole world spend time, money and computing resources fighting this ***** crap. We need to stamp it out properly. The first steps should be widespread adoption of white-list only email, black-listing and blocking ISPs that allow spamming, and severe penalties for spammers who fake return addresses.
- harlowsmonkeys, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Something's wrong here. There's no schestowitz comment blaming this all on Microsoft, and giving 5000 irrelevant links.
- Firehed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nothing makes it through to my Gmail inbox, but I don't get that much anyways (I'm careful about who gets my email address; generally not more than 20 per day). That said, I've found that I do get stuff that's technically false positives, but with the amount of "legit" mail I get from school-wide mass-mailings, they're as good as spam as well. But back in 2004 or so when I had a horribly contaminated inbox, I'd say a solid 95% of the messages I got were spam, though Thunderbird's filtering took care of almost all of it once I switched over.
- bonus45, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1News flash !!! Water is wet, film at 11.
- The_Dude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Human Spam? I love it. That describes huge masses of humanity that have always been around. Sheep, the herd, plebians, the hoi paloi, etc. That's not new!
- rajivm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This seems pretty self-evident, my spam folder currently has 218,960 emails. I was considering giving them away for people to use as a "bad" sample for a Baysean filter.
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2http://www.zug.com/pranks/viagra/
A detailed description of what it's like to buy viagra from a spam email. - plbland, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Surely whether you receive the spam or not is irrelevant? I bet these stats are based on spam sent rather than spam making it into your inbox - for example my gmail spam box contains over 1000 emails - do these count of spam even though they have been filtered out?
- snotrokit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1and this is news? As of about 5 minutes ago, my spam gateway has blocked over 726,000 messages, and allowed 178,500. Not much slips through these days, I see it as the cost of doing business.
My GMail account used to be 100% spam free, but then I made an awful mistake of sending a Network Solutions transfer notice to my GMail, been screwed ever since. (I was moving a domain FROM NetSol) Google needs to market whatever concoction they use, I think they hit 100% of the spam in my mailbox. - Sabin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://digg.com/tech_news/Teens_E_mail_is_for_old_people
Email is for old people....rather convenient that they are the target market for viagra/cialis/whatever. - gugin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nice! You can now email humans as attachments.
- intense321, on 10/12/2007, -0/+140 a day? That's nothing. I'm approaching 20,000 a day.
- RoflMyWaffle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Really? i could have sworn 2001 had more spam than human email, and 2002, and 2003, etc. you get the idea...
- ThreeDee912, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The thing is: I can't believe people still are clicking on those ads for some ***** fake penis growing pills.
- encognito, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Spam e-mail blocking:
1. Create a Spam e-mail address (I use Hotmail)
2. Give this address to likely spammers (online merchants, warranty cards, online sites that might sell your address)
3. Create your primary e-mail address (I use Gmail)
4. Give this address to reputable organizations and people
5. Forward Gmail e-mail to Thunderbird client utilizing Gmail for further Spam filtering and backup
6. Use Thunderbird’s junk filter if necessary (I rarely use it)
7. Mentally chuckle at people who spend money to block Spam
Junk snail mail blocking:
1. Obtain a PO Box
2. Give this address to reputable organizations and people
3. Conveniently dump residential address junk mail into nearest recycling bin without looking through it for your important mail. - bobbknight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is news?
- ThreeDee912, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Er... PGP?
- yourbrokenoven, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1it already does have more spam than human e-mail. duh.
- foltaggio, on 07/11/2008, -1/+2This is news? There's already more spam then human emails. (well technically spammers are human emails, but you get the point)
- Rekzai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wooooooo can't wait
- emagdnim56, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1wasn't there already a story back in the day saying that 9 out of 10 emails were spam?
- AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -2/+2I already get about 40 pieces of spam in my Yahoo Inbox every single day, and thats with the ***** spam filter on.
I've thought about writing a letter to Yahoo, but they won't do *****. :(
Thank God for backup gmail accounts. - angusm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There are services such as Sneakemail that will do this for you. (Google for 'disposable email addresses' for more).
Or if you have a domain of your own and a certain amount of control over the mail system, you can do what I did and build your own solution based on something like the Perl Mail::Audit module (Mail::Audit isn't required, but it makes implementing something like this trivial). - antonio97b, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1With the advent of instant messaging and cell phones (txt). I never really "email anyone". I email myself my paper just in case I forget to bring it to class, I can print it out there. Or, perhaps activation emails.
I say for every 3 real emails I get, I will have to delete about 15 spam. It has been like that for a while actually. -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is