[extropy-chat] Spam

[Adrian Tymes]

Just a few examples...

--- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> > Spike wrote:
> > > As a thought experiment, ignore the means and
> list those
> > > who would have the motive to mess up the
> internet, or whose
> > > lives may have been better off without it:
> > > 
> > > Bricks'n'mortar merchants
> 
> Why?  It is cheaper to put something on the web and
> sale it perhaps with drop shipment than run showroom
> floors.  

Yes, but to anyone who hasn't adopted those practices,
and refuses to for whatever reason (say, they falsely
believe that putting their inventory online means
it'll get stolen in a heartbeat by someone with a
fake credit card, or a hacker planting false orders
in their database; or, they simply haven't grokked the
Web yet), playing with the Web is not (yet) an option.

> > > Anyone who sells primarily information, such as
> > > Ministers
> 
> Many ministers are flocking to the net to reach a
> larger flock.

And many more decry the 'Net for allowing access to
"evil" viewpoints (read: anyone who disagrees with the
minister...although there are those online that most
people agree are evil too).

> > > Publishers
> 
> Being found by search engines on the net perhaps
> with excerpts is darn cheap advertising.  There are
> ways to sale published information on the net with
> minimum risk of being ripped off.  And again, at
> lower costs.

See the brick 'n' mortar example - but this has some
famous real examples: the RIAA and the MPAA.  Most of
us can probably imagine ways for them to sell securely
online, with minimal risk of being ripped off big
time.  But in practice, their efforts have been
minimal, hesitant, and lacking in content - and thus
far from the vast rewards they are otherwise promised.
But that does not seem to have caused their hardening
against the 'Net; the cause seems to be that, by
allowing so many advertising channels they can not
flood and dominate, the 'Net gives exposure to their
competition: indie bands that focus more on talent
than glitz.  Of course they'd prefer to shut down
their competition...

> > > Teachers (some of them)
> 
> What for?  Any teacher interested in teaching would
> send her students all over the internet for
> educational purposes.  

Emphasis: "interested in teaching".  Some teachers
see only the ability to download common essays and
"cheat" on learning things that were relevant in the
last century.  (Yes, it's a good thing to be able to
spellcheck your works manually.  But for big, long
essays, you'd better get in the habit of applying
your own effort and letting the computer help -
neither relying on your own efforts or the computer's
to the exclusion of the other, because neither one
will catch everything.)