Comment by ToucanLoucan

2 years ago

> Almost no-one is pro-spam

In fact there are really only two groups that are pro-spam: spammers, obviously, and the entities that provide them services from which they may spam.

Oh sure basically any provider of any service be it phone, web hosting, email, etc. will say they don't want spammers, and the email providers may actually mean it what with them not wanting their server's scores trashed and be unable to get email to anyone (though plenty others don't give a shit), but website hosts, telephone companies, and SMS providers? They utterly do not care and in fact go out of their way to not know when spammers are (mis)using their services.

Meanwhile like that other commenter said, everyone is incentivized to enter walled garden services that actually do the barest minimum of enforcement for spam activity. I doubt they're conspiring in a dark room somewhere, but neither side is going to upset at the other in that situation.

Hence my other example of the inability to police prisons enough to prevent abuse, I didn't allege an explicit scheming but a happy little accident. Allowing a problem to fester when it benefits you is totally normal and expected behavior. But if there is a role for government at all it would be regulate such dysfunctions.

> In fact there are really only two groups that are pro-spam

you forgot the entire marketing industry

> everyone is incentivized to enter walled garden services that actually do the barest minimum of enforcement for spam activity

These walled gardens actively spam you—that's how they make money. They only act against competing advertisers.

For there to be an incentive to avoid spam, we would need a social network not funded by it. To my knowledge this is essentially ActivityPub. In order for ActivityPub to be useful, we need an incentive to drag celebrities away from private paychecks that benefit from manipulation of other social networks (twitter, ig, tt). I don't believe there is any such entity or incentivization right now.

Not quite. For example politicians benefit from being able to solicit donations over mass text.