On last.fm: 2009 summer music festivals
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By Jo Best
Posted on ZDNet News: Jan 26, 2004 8:24:00 PM

The battle to rid the world's in-boxes of spam has got itself a heavyweight champion--Bill Gates--making an even more heavyweight promise: an end to the e-mail plague within two years.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Gates told a group of delegates that he could crack spam by 2006. The soon-to-be-knighted Microsoft chairman added that with the help of some canny tech measures, spammers would be hit where it hurts--in their fat wads of Viagra-inspired cash.

One of the suggestions on Gates' antispam checklist is setting those sending e-mails a simple brainteaser, or asking their PCs to do an easy computation. If you're sending an odd e-mail or two, the time and difficulty wouldn't pose much of a problem. For machines belching out huge amounts of spam day in and day out, however, the cost and computing power needed to send the e-mails off through the ether would be huge.

Microsoft researchers earlier this year demonstrated the technology, which is called No Spam at any (CPU) speed.

Gates also said Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft is working on another "magic solution" to the spam problem--this time with a focus on the identifying the sender.

The "payment at risk" system would involve e-mail recipients setting a level of payment that would tax the sender, if its e-mail were rejected, low or high, depending on how greatly recipients were bothered by the unwanted e-mail.

The idea goes like this: If you receive an e-mail from an old school friend, and you're happy to receive it, the sender doesn't pay. If it's another offer of a porn subscription, you reject it, and the spammer is forced to cough up.

That's the theory, at least. But Martino Corbelli, a spokesman for U.K. spam-filtering company SurfControl, doesn't buy it. "I think the idea is a nice one, and I don't disagree that in a few years' time, the spam epidemic will reduce--that will happen. But as for charging someone when you don't know who they are and where they are--it's not feasible," he told Silicon.com.

The tech old guard of spam fighting--the humble mail filter--wasn't entirely rejected by Gates. He acknowledged that filters have their part to play in the spam struggle but said he believed that they wouldn't ultimately solve the problem.

Gates' spam offensive has left Corbelli unimpressed. "I think he's right on the timescale; I think he's wrong on the method. We simply don't have the infrastructure to know who to charge," he said.

Jo Best of Silicon.com reported from London.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 60 Talkback(s)
I want some of what Bill is smoking!!!!
I want some of what Bill is smoking!!!! (Read the rest)
Posted by: kindb Posted on: 03/26/06 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
He actually had a thought?  ITGuy04 | 01/26/04
Actually he just stole it...  SloooeShflu | 01/26/04
There was a thought in there?  jstead1 | 01/26/04
exac tly  JWatson77 | 01/26/04
Yes Billy Boy had a thought  Fred Flintsone | 01/26/04
No, correct spelling  ITGuy04 | 01/26/04
spelling  IT-man_z | 01/26/04
One question.  Cardinal_Bill | 01/26/04
Another Question  Suicida| | 01/26/04
one answer  IT-man_z | 01/26/04
best aproach  dg mh | 01/26/04
Can you say...  jstead1 | 01/26/04
sending an email that requires computation  kenlars99 | 01/26/04
This is a watershed moment..  Mike Cox | 01/26/04
Ding  ejhonda | 01/27/04
This is EASILY doable...  BitTwiddler | 01/26/04
Headed in the wrong direction  rock06r | 01/27/04
Bill Gates is designing a new way to overcharge us.  Vily Clay | 01/26/04
email sending viruses  JWatson77 | 01/26/04
That?s what could happen when B.G. will implement his idea. (NT)  Vily Clay | 01/26/04
Then they could just charge it back to microsoft.  Suicida| | 01/26/04
Money will go to Bush, then to Bill Gates? pocket; unless ?  Vily Clay | 01/27/04
Consider how important this position is.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/26/04
Don't waste your breath  tooner440 | 01/26/04
Sadly, you are right.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/26/04
Thankfully neither of you are  SloooeShflu | 01/26/04
When did reality visit you?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/27/04
at what cost?  ryusen | 01/26/04
too many questions...  ryusen | 01/26/04
None of the venders you listed suffer from this problem!  B.O.F.H. | 01/27/04
Huh?  Patrick Jones | 01/27/04
Important for more MS profits  tic swayback | 01/27/04
Virus writers are salivating....  StuckInNYForever | 01/26/04
good  zijiang | 04/16/04
Trust worthy computing two years later  bill@... | 01/26/04
This will not work for a lot of companies  issthatso | 01/26/04
They are all missing the point  Tux Groomer | 01/26/04
opt in would be best actually  nograin | 01/26/04
Not really..  Patrick Jones | 01/27/04
I hate these new talkbacks!  Patrick Jones | 01/27/04
That's great! Now, what's the magic solution to security?  Jose Jimenez | 01/26/04
HELLO!  Cardinal_Bill | 01/26/04
Hello!  Fred Flintsone | 01/26/04
Dear Fred,  Cardinal_Bill | 01/26/04
wonder if would only be windows to windows  JWatson77 | 01/26/04
Surely this is a joke  Richard Flude | 01/26/04
Two years ONLY?  michael-t | 01/26/04
BillGates More Dangerous Than Spam  brenthawkinsmd | 01/26/04
More input!  John L. Ries | 01/26/04
Just $49.95  joeivie@... | 01/27/04
re: He had a thought?  graphic3211 | 01/27/04
He already had a solution  supoman | 01/27/04
Ok, now plug the security holes for viruses!!!  homesteadcustom | 01/27/04
What Spam?  PitLord | 01/27/04
Simpler solution?  PEG_z | 01/27/04
Spammers Pay - What About This?  This-n-that | 01/27/04
Thw MS solution to everything!  nite_w0lf | 01/28/04
not fair to charge spoofed address owner...  bdavison@... | 01/28/04
This worked out wonderfully  b.d.hi | 03/02/06
I want some of what Bill is smoking!!!!  kindb | 03/26/06

What do you think?

advertisement
advertisement

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here