Some readers of my proposal for Spam Guarantees believe that my solution is too complex or costly. I concede that simpler approaches, such as authentication will be tried first, and will provide temporary relief, but ultimately a market-based solution will be necessary.

When such a market is created, it will appear gradually, and it will need to use real money, or it will be unable to police fraud.

It will not eliminate all spam, but offer a way for legitimate senders to avoid becoming spam filter false positives.

Here’s an overview of my views on whether market-based solutions should use “Computer-Time” or “Real Money”. The issue reminds me of Hayek and the “Calculation Debate“.

Anti-Spam Currencies: Computational vs Monetary

Two of the biggest obstacles to implementing a market-based solution to spam are:

1. Expense: the cost of administering and billing for each email transaction; and
2. Fraud: the inevitable attempts to capture the newly created currency

Expense

The “computational” school of thought argues that a postage or guarantee system that uses real money will cost too much to administer.

Accounts will need to be created, tracked, and billed. With so many transactions, the overhead will be enormous.

A system that requires computers to solve a math problem will require no accounts, tracking or billing.

Fraud

Both approaches are vulnerable to fraud.

If the system uses real money, hackers will surely attempt to steal a sender’s key and use it like a stolen credit card.

If the system treats computer-time as currency, hackers will surreptitiously commandeer computers to poach the postage.

Scope Modesty: Certified Mail for the Web

With my proposal for email guarantees, I don’t pretend to the immediately eradicate all spam forever. Imagine instead a system that starts as a premium service, much like current-day certified and registered mail.

People and businesses who really value the email they send will set up accounts to guarantee their mail. This will ensure that their messages make it through the spam filters unscathed.

Not all transactions will need to be tracked for billing purposes, only those messages unwanted by their recipients.

Monetary Incentives

Because senders have to pay for “cashed” email, they will limit the unwanted messages they send, limiting the transaction load that their Credit Company needs to process. The Credit Companies can charge a fee to cover the cost of processing the “cashed” email.

To limit the amount of fraud, Credit Companies will track the amount of guarantees that have been collected. Accounts that reach their limit will be frozen.

Credit Companies may offer to absorb the cost of stolen keys, provided that account holders follow certain security practices. If not, the account holder would be liable, up to the limit of their account.

Computational Incentives

In the computational model, senders and computer owners take no responsibility for securing their systems.

A hacker could install a program on my computer that allows him to offload email computations to my computer.

If my credit card is not being charged for the postage he counterfeits, and the hacker is smart enough not to make my system unusable, I am unlikely to devote the resources necessary to:

• avoid getting the program in the first place
• removing it, once I have it

Holding someone liable for poor security creates an incentive to limit the exposure of currency and tighten up security.

Some people may decide that their security is so poor that they are unable to offer a guarantee.

Their messages may still make it through the spam filter, but they run a greater risk of being overlooked.

Technical approaches to spam such as authentication and bayesian analysis are useful in the short term, but ultimately an economic solution is needed.

I propose guaranteed email: email whose sender offers to pay if the recipient is unhappy with the message.

Others have proposed electronic postage as a way to price the junk out of the market. That’s essentially what I propose except

1. no money changes hands if the recipient is happy with the message.
2. money is paid to the recipient, rather than a third party like the postal service or Microsoft

Example

I write an email to Dave Winer.

Dave gets a lot of email and I want my message to stand out from the spam and other unsolicited “great ideas”.

If I were sending Dave a letter, I would be willing to pay the postal service 37 cents; but to make my email stand out I offer 67 cents. Economists call this signaling.

My email client attaches a file to my email and names it guarantee.xml. This file follows a standard format

<guarantee type>
satisfaction guaranteed
noncommercial
existing business relationship
family
not pornography



</guarantee type>
    <guarantee amount>
$0.05
$0.25
$0.67
$1.25
$7.50



</guarantee amount>
    <signature url>
http://www.example.com/signature/?username=timlangeman



    </signature url>
    <signature contents>
      Standard PGP signature used to verify:
        the guarantee is offered by the sendor,
        applies to the recipient,
        for the content of the email,
        with the guarantee type and amount </signature contents>

Dave’s email client already has filtering software built-in.
It would take extra programming, but this filtering software could be modified to parse the guarantee.xml file, lookup and verify the signature, and factor-in the guarantee amount.

To increase Dave’s trust that I won’t default on the 67 cents, my Credit Card (or some such) agency signs my key in a similar way that I signed the email, asserting that they will back up any email guarantee, for up to (say) $7.50.

“Cashing” unwanted Email

If Dave “cashes” his email, my Credit card company will bill me. If I don’t pay my bills, they will revoke their signature on my key.

Since there are a smaller number of Credit agencies, Dave’s filtering software can set up a “trusted” set up Guarantors. (This key signing is similar to the way SSL Certificates work).

Email Clients

Ideally every email program will have a button to “cash” an email. Barring that, people could forward the email on to an address to receive payment. Microsoft’s Outlook and Hotmail are the biggest email clients. Plugins to these would go a long way in gaining momentum.

Credit Companies

As for the “Credit Companies”, this is the most difficult part of this whole proposal. It’s going to take a company with experience dealing with fraud and billing, who is also willing to deal in small transactions. I think Paypal might be a good fit. They’re not a conventional bank and it would be a great way to add customers.

The upside of this is that they could charge a small percentage for every “cashed” email. That’s gotta be worth something.

Related

• ZDNet Discussion: skeptical of any scheme proposed by Bill Gates that involves collecting money
• FogCreek Discussion with similar idea, found after this piece was written
• Vadim Makarov with the same idea, also found after this piece was written
• Bonded Sender
• How to Stop Junk E-Mail: Charge for the Stamp

Ted Nelson’s Xanadu project has a vision for hypertext where you can quote a document without copying it. The goal is to have something like a pointer to the the selected portion of the original.

I was reading some of Ted’s archives and noticed his use of an  open source eprints publishing software. By counting the number of characters a selection is offset from the start of the document, Eprints allows people to construct links to specific selections. Linked selections can then be shown in context or excerpted in raw text.

Seeing how easily sections could be quoted got me excited about performing similar quotations on my website, but I soon realized that it would be more difficult than using simple html links.

The Quoting Architecture: Start with Quoting Proxies

All I want to do is a “remote include“, but html and javascript don’t allow me to do this directly, so I constructed an intermediary script that acts as a proxy.

The author performing the quotation instructs the reader’s browser to ask the proxy to serve it a remote web page:

<script LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.2" TYPE='text/javascript'
src="http://www.openpolitics.com/transquote/?url=
https://web.archive.org/web/20041123015431/http://tprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/11/01/zifty-d9.txt;
locspec=charrange:2721/381">
</script>

The proxy script connects to the remote web site on behalf of the reader:

  //open a connection with a timeout of 30 seconds
    $fp = fsockopen($host, $port, $errno, $errstr, 30);        
    fwrite($fp, $out);
    $body = false;
    while (!feof($fp)) {
        $s = fgets($fp, 1024);
        if ( $body )
            $in .= $s;
        if ( $s == "\r\n")
            $body = true;
    }
    fclose($fp);

    (Full Source)

It retrieves the contents of the page and outputs it back to the reader in Javascript output format.

   document.write("The usual story about Xerox PARC,
    that they were trying to make the computer
    understandable to the average man, was a crock.
    They imitated paper and familiar office machines
    because that was what the Xerox executives
    could understand. Xerox was a paper-walloping company,
    and all other concepts had to be ironed onto paper,
    like toner, to be even visible in their paper paradigm.");

Result:

This javascript output method is the same technique
Google uses to deliver its advertisements.

Architecture: Putting the Quotation Logic in the Proxy

It is only because Ted’s eprint server allows offsetted quoting that I
am so easily able to fetch an excerpt.

For other sites, it may make sense to implement the eprints functionality
at the proxy level. This would allow selections to be specified and a greater context shown — all without requiring the quotee to implement any addition server-side features.

For performance and realiabilty reasons, it may make sense for the proxy to cache a copy of the quotation. For compatiblity, it would be nice if all quotations used a standard syntax to specify a quotation. That way the functionality could be added to the browser and quotation meta could be aggregated by search engines.

A Final Note on Security: Open Proxies

If this were to become common, operators of proxies would probably need to only allow registered quotations, otherwise they would be overwhelmed by requests.

Related

• Php Source Code
• Eprints VLit Transclusion Support
• Credits: Eprints Translusion implementation

I’ve wanted GIS-camera integration for over a year, but now I’ve found the perfect marketing strategy to accelerate its adoption. It’s an opportunity for Google to introduce its brand even deeper into people’s lives, while integrating two of Google’s recent acquisitions:

1. the Picasa photo organizer and
2. the Keyhole Satellite Imaging Service

Marketing the Product: Canon Digital Rebel with Google PictureLink

Google will develop a trademark to signify that a Camera :

• is capable of saving GIS data with the picture and
• comes with the software necessary to organize and find photos

For my example, I’ll coin the term “PhotoLink.”

Google would approach various camera makers about including a GIS unit and Google’s software with their cameras. I hear that GIS sensors are now only about $10, so Google should be willing to subsidize their cost if the camera maker agrees to include a Google logo on the camera body.

The Logo would serve a similar purpose to the Intel’s Centrino brand, which signifies mobility through wifi and longer battery life.

PictureLink would signify the ability to connect a picture to:

• other people’s picturessatellite images and maps

And of course with the Google brand, everyone will know that it will be easy to find the photo they’re looking for

Using the the Product

Customers will take pictures as normal, but when they load the photos onto their computer, Picasa will extract GIS metadata stored in EXIF fields.

In addition to the Timeline, Picasa users will have a Keyhole-like way to Enjoy their Photos:

• grouped by location
• overlaid on top of a satellite view

In the “Share your photos” section, Picasa users will have the option of “Sharing with the Public”.

Regardless of their own decision to share, Picasa users will have the option of viewing public pictures from the same or a nearby Location.

Collaborative Photography Example

Suppose I take pictures of hurricane damage in Florida. I may only get a few good ones, and I wonder if other people are willing to share their photos. With PhotoLink, I am able to see all other PhotoLink-enabled public photos.

Some professionals may want to participate as well. They could have a publicly indexable thumbnail, but charge a fee for a high quality version.

Related

• Add Geographical Data To Digital Images
• GPSPhotoLinker for Mac OS 10.3