In the funny Monty Python skit, a chorus of Vikings drowns out other sounds by singing “SPAM, SPAM, SPAM”, glorifying the omnipresent American canned meat icon. SPAM’s Internet namesake is not funny at all, as it literally drowns legitimate e-mails in an outpour of junk messages.
The pesky e-mail spam, which on the insistence of the trademark owner, should be written in small letters to distinguish it from SPAM®, is surprisingly older than public e-mail: the first piece of spam was sent on May 3, 1978, well before e-mail became commercially available (indeed, only a short time after the world’s first experimental e-mail message was sent in 1971 by Ray Tomlinson). The first spam was addressed to a list taken from a printed directory of ARPANET users – the first major wide-area computer network. At that time, it was comprised mostly of universities and select corporations, making the subject of the spam especially apt – a new computer system.
The reaction to this act of aggressive marketing was swift and overwhelming. One MIT professor even angrily suggested that nobody should be allowed to send messages with headers that long, no matter the subject, although he complained about that as well. The first spam quickly gave birth to the first spam fighters. The US military, which controlled ARPANET, issued a stern warning to every user on the network.
Since then, much has changed. The original small group of privileged users exchanging a few occasional short messages grew to 1.3 billion modern e-mail users worldwide sending more than 200 billion e-mails every day (over 2 million every second.)
By some estimates, between 70% and 90% of this volume is spam. If every spam sent in a single day were a can of SPAM®, there would easily be enough to feed all the hungry of the world for a year. This suggests a possible (although highly controversial) solution to the spam problem – charging a small fee for every e-mail sent out – even if only a penny. For sure, it would eliminate almost all spam, but what about the legitimate users of e-mail? Are we ready to pay a few extra dollars for a spam-free world? Apparently, most netizens are not keen to the idea. Too bad. A single penny per e-mail could go a long way towards not only exterminating pest spam but also helping to solve major global problems. With a penny ‘per’ toll with the current volume of e-mails, the revenues would cover the initial US economic bailout cost of $700B in just one year. But my calculator is itching to share some more fun facts: if you were to put all the pennies from a year’s worth of e-mails side by side, the chain would reach the Sun 10 times! Our Moon is too easy a target – it would take only several hours to build a spine of pennies for the new space elevator.
In November 2008, the FBI scored a major victory by shutting down what they deemed the main spam portal. The U.S.-based company, McColo Corp., catered to bulk e-mailers, and its deactivation cut the amount of global spam more than in half in just one day. The relief did not last, unfortunately – in just a few days the perpetrators, very much like Hydra, regenerated their amputated limbs and were back in business with a vengeance, running it from other countries.
The future, however, is not so bleak. Education is beginning to take effect. Many home users are now protected by firewalls, antivirus software and spam filters. Through enforceable Internet policies, businesses prevent employees from sending spam and other inappropriate messages. Even Microsoft is increasingly engaged in the battlefield and future versions of Windows might be ‘bullet-proof’ to spam.
Spam-protection strategies range from small to geo-political. Unfortunately, neither method is universal. If a spam filter tries to block the word ‘cialis’, it also removes all legitimate e-mails containing the word ‘specialist’. On a global scale, some suggest to ‘cut’ entire countries harboring spammers off the net. This is not likely to happen any time soon though, as the biggest source of spam is the USA.
Spammers make their living while there is a receptive audience for cheap Rolexes, offers to raise the manhood ego, solicitations to redeem an inheritance from Nigeria and a chance to make a quick buck exploiting commercial market research surveys. The most efficient method for spam extermination is simple and low-tech: just don’t open spam. If spammers do not have business, there is no reason to send more offers. If we do not use them, they will be out of cash and out of business soon.
