<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does SPAM force us to switch messaging technologies?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/</link>
	<description>Interface Design &#38; UX by Joshua Porter</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 20:28:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: beforeyoukillyourcomputer.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Does SPAM force us to switch messaging technologies?</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-68272</link>
		<dc:creator>beforeyoukillyourcomputer.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Does SPAM force us to switch messaging technologies?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2007 22:13:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-68272</guid>
		<description>[...] Source [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Source [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marcus</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-66285</link>
		<dc:creator>marcus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 22:26:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-66285</guid>
		<description>Spam isn&#039;t script kiddies, it is direct marketers, typically running as real businesses making real dollars during a real workday. They might pay script kiddies, but you&#039;re far more apt to find reasonably capable technologists figuring out how to bypass network controls. A big difference.

Spam in domain names easily refers somewhat evangelically, yet not too far off, to domain name speculators who overran the system. Search for a few domain name ideas, things you want to register, for a usage besides speculation, and you&#039;ll probably find that its taken by a speculator, not someone actually using it.

The success of any system will ensure three after markets, black, gray, and good. Its just how it works. It sucks. But that&#039;s where the balance between free enterprise and regulation needs to step in. The libertarians say that government involvement is reprehensible, the capitalists say the market solves its own problems, and the leftists tend toward regulatory control. 

Each of those fails in their own perfect world. We have to put up with the gray-market, or at least make the blockage of them a choice, try disallow the intrinsically black-market (meaning the objectively unethical), and teach the good to our kids by example =)

Interestingly, or perhaps disturbingly, the perfect network that blocks all gray markets will also block all things that the moral majority claims are gray market. Sad how soon after government abuses of all kinds people will still trust those bodies that should always be drastically controlled in the scope of their power, i.e. all branches of government and their law enforcement arms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Spam isn&#8217;t script kiddies, it is direct marketers, typically running as real businesses making real dollars during a real workday. They might pay script kiddies, but you&#8217;re far more apt to find reasonably capable technologists figuring out how to bypass network controls. A big difference.</p>
<p>Spam in domain names easily refers somewhat evangelically, yet not too far off, to domain name speculators who overran the system. Search for a few domain name ideas, things you want to register, for a usage besides speculation, and you&#8217;ll probably find that its taken by a speculator, not someone actually using it.</p>
<p>The success of any system will ensure three after markets, black, gray, and good. Its just how it works. It sucks. But that&#8217;s where the balance between free enterprise and regulation needs to step in. The libertarians say that government involvement is reprehensible, the capitalists say the market solves its own problems, and the leftists tend toward regulatory control. </p>
<p>Each of those fails in their own perfect world. We have to put up with the gray-market, or at least make the blockage of them a choice, try disallow the intrinsically black-market (meaning the objectively unethical), and teach the good to our kids by example =)</p>
<p>Interestingly, or perhaps disturbingly, the perfect network that blocks all gray markets will also block all things that the moral majority claims are gray market. Sad how soon after government abuses of all kinds people will still trust those bodies that should always be drastically controlled in the scope of their power, i.e. all branches of government and their law enforcement arms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-66071</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 09:11:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-66071</guid>
		<description>Pauric,

That&#039;s an interesting analogy! Evolution might explain it best of all...SPAM acts as a kind of winnower...making the strain of email that survives that much stronger. 

I think we&#039;re also seeing this with social networks...those are evolving rapidly to survive. The Facebook riots over the news feed (with resulting interface changes), for example, is evidence of evolution for survival. Good technology is surviving, in some cases, while the people kill off the bad ones.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pauric,</p>
<p>That&#8217;s an interesting analogy! Evolution might explain it best of all&#8230;SPAM acts as a kind of winnower&#8230;making the strain of email that survives that much stronger. </p>
<p>I think we&#8217;re also seeing this with social networks&#8230;those are evolving rapidly to survive. The Facebook riots over the news feed (with resulting interface changes), for example, is evidence of evolution for survival. Good technology is surviving, in some cases, while the people kill off the bad ones.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pauric</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65815</link>
		<dc:creator>Pauric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2007 20:18:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65815</guid>
		<description>Junk mail didnt stop us writing letters, a more convient method came along - email.  The same may or may not happen to email. While I don&#039;t disagree that spam is a serious issue, I like to apply evolutionary theory, natural selection, as to why something might die off.  A virus wont kill off a species, natural selection says an equilibrium will be reached.  Spam wont kill email, it has to let it survive just enough or spam itself will dissappear.  It also follows that we&#039;ll never see a communication system that isnt somehow governed/limited/choked/capped or abused.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Junk mail didnt stop us writing letters, a more convient method came along &#8211; email.  The same may or may not happen to email. While I don&#8217;t disagree that spam is a serious issue, I like to apply evolutionary theory, natural selection, as to why something might die off.  A virus wont kill off a species, natural selection says an equilibrium will be reached.  Spam wont kill email, it has to let it survive just enough or spam itself will dissappear.  It also follows that we&#8217;ll never see a communication system that isnt somehow governed/limited/choked/capped or abused.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sosauce Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The never-ending pursuit for more efficient means of communication.</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65688</link>
		<dc:creator>Sosauce Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The never-ending pursuit for more efficient means of communication.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2007 16:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65688</guid>
		<description>[...] Joshua Porter has a pretty accurate comment on why the youth are migrating toward social networking based communication tools from email and IM: I think that SPAM does cause fatigueâ€¦but actually isnâ€™t powerful enough to get us to switch technologies. I think usability has a lot to do with actual switching. Simply put, we message in the easiest way possible. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Joshua Porter has a pretty accurate comment on why the youth are migrating toward social networking based communication tools from email and IM: I think that SPAM does cause fatigueâ€¦but actually isnâ€™t powerful enough to get us to switch technologies. I think usability has a lot to do with actual switching. Simply put, we message in the easiest way possible. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sosauce Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The never-ending pursuit for The never-ending pursuit for more efficient means of communication.</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65687</link>
		<dc:creator>Sosauce Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The never-ending pursuit for The never-ending pursuit for more efficient means of communication.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2007 16:46:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65687</guid>
		<description>[...] Joshua Porter has a pretty accurate comment on why the youth are migrating toward social networking based communication tools from email and IM: I think that SPAM does cause fatigueâ€¦but actually isnâ€™t powerful enough to get us to switch technologies. I think usability has a lot to do with actual switching. Simply put, we message in the easiest way possible. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Joshua Porter has a pretty accurate comment on why the youth are migrating toward social networking based communication tools from email and IM: I think that SPAM does cause fatigueâ€¦but actually isnâ€™t powerful enough to get us to switch technologies. I think usability has a lot to do with actual switching. Simply put, we message in the easiest way possible. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Congratulations: you&#8217;ve been spammed &#171; User Experience Daily</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65383</link>
		<dc:creator>Congratulations: you&#8217;ve been spammed &#171; User Experience Daily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2007 00:26:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65383</guid>
		<description>[...] 5th, 2007 &#183; No Comments  Joshua Porter writes a great articleÂ on spam, and how it changes and is changed by thetechnologies we use to communicate. I&#8217;ve heard over and over again now how young people are switching from old (!) technologies like e-mail and IM to text messaging and social networking sites. Some say this change is caused by teenagers being fed-up with spam. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 5th, 2007 &middot; No Comments  Joshua Porter writes a great articleÂ on spam, and how it changes and is changed by thetechnologies we use to communicate. I&#8217;ve heard over and over again now how young people are switching from old (!) technologies like e-mail and IM to text messaging and social networking sites. Some say this change is caused by teenagers being fed-up with spam. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aligrator - Is SPAM Diminishig the Usefuleness of Email Promos? (From Bokardo)</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65143</link>
		<dc:creator>aligrator - Is SPAM Diminishig the Usefuleness of Email Promos? (From Bokardo)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2007 16:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65143</guid>
		<description>[...] Is SPAM Diminishig the Usefuleness of Email Promos? (From Bokardo) LINK [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Is SPAM Diminishig the Usefuleness of Email Promos? (From Bokardo) LINK [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CJ Millisock</title>
		<link>http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65052</link>
		<dc:creator>CJ Millisock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:28:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bokardo.com/archives/does-spam-force-us-to-switch-messaging-technologies/#comment-65052</guid>
		<description>I agree completely.  SPAM doesn&#039;t directly force us to switch technologies, but it can make a technology much more difficult to use (ie SPAM forces email users to wade through their inboxes/spam folders and decide which messages are good), which in turn can create an opportunity for an easier communication technology to come about.

It&#039;s all about convenience, or &quot;context and usability&quot; as you&#039;ve said.  As long as we&#039;re able to successfully and accurately fight off spam with algorithms, email will remain a very convenient method of communication, and we won&#039;t switch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree completely.  SPAM doesn&#8217;t directly force us to switch technologies, but it can make a technology much more difficult to use (ie SPAM forces email users to wade through their inboxes/spam folders and decide which messages are good), which in turn can create an opportunity for an easier communication technology to come about.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s all about convenience, or &#8220;context and usability&#8221; as you&#8217;ve said.  As long as we&#8217;re able to successfully and accurately fight off spam with algorithms, email will remain a very convenient method of communication, and we won&#8217;t switch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

