If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Spammers cost US businesses thirteen billion dollars last year. That's Billion, with a B as in BASTARDS   (cnn.com) divider line 97
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

6849 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jan 2003 at 6:24 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



97 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-01-03 02:30:52 PM
4.4 seconds per spam? who the hell takes that long?
 
2003-01-03 02:38:37 PM
Haha, that headline gave me a chuckle
 
2003-01-03 03:24:05 PM
Ever wonder how much faster the internet would be if they're were so much crap spam floating around? *Bastards*
 
2003-01-03 05:18:44 PM
Megain: I think they meant on average (that includes the dopes who accidentally click and spend 5 minutes trying to get back to where they were).

I do question the results of this study, however. It would be interesting to see the full details of how they put these numbers together.

For instance: how did they come up with 4.4 seconds per spam = 13 Billion in lost revenue? What salary bracket is that? How much spam did they average that with? Did they take into account that roundabout half of spam goes to individuals rather than businesses?

I don't want to be a pain in the ass; I really would like to see those numbers.
 
2003-01-03 06:28:20 PM
It was 9 billion on Headline News this morning....
 
2003-01-03 06:29:21 PM
so there saying spam is a big money maker? that's great
 
2003-01-03 06:29:31 PM
Someone sure is B is for BITTER.
 
2003-01-03 06:30:11 PM
Was the cost of the study included in that $13 billion?
 
2003-01-03 06:30:35 PM
workers waste more time on Fark than reading spam.
 
2003-01-03 06:31:02 PM
"Figuring it takes 4.4 seconds on average to deal with a message, the messages add up to $4 billion in lost productivity for U.S. businesses each year."

Please, how much does Fark cost businesses then?
 
2003-01-03 06:32:58 PM
Wouldn't be nearly that much if the fatcats poured some of their 50 million dollar salaries back into the business(es) they claim to love.
 
2003-01-03 06:33:27 PM
*grunt*

Headline good.

Fire bad.
 
2003-01-03 06:34:00 PM
[i]Parts of northern and eastern Finland have seen temperatures plunge to minus 40 Celsius (minus 40 Fahrenheit) or colder,[/i]

minus 40 Celsius equals minus 40 Fahrenheit?
Wow, I never knew.

Hey, and nobody start Finn Bashing!
 
2003-01-03 06:34:06 PM
I work for an ISP and get about 3 calls a day from businesses who are pissed about spam. While this study could not possibly be completely accurate.... They are dead on about the time it takes away from legitimate internet use.
 
2003-01-03 06:34:41 PM
Shut........UP

well, i figure the average farker spends 8 hours a day, 200 days a year on fark. that's gotta add up to at least 3.5 trillion dollars.

/bad statistics
 
2003-01-03 06:34:53 PM
i won't finn bash as long as you put your comments in the right e-ffing thingee
 
2003-01-03 06:34:57 PM
They used to do the same thing to fax machines in the 80s. Office fax machines would be going 24/7, churning out ads. Costed them money, paper, time, everything. Then they passed a law in Congress declaring unsolicited fax advertising illegal. Now it doesn't happen anymore.

They should do the same thing with the internet, the only problem is the abject anonymity of spammers. But I'm sure technology can get around that. Before it was just a minor bother I could live with, but now its just a horrendous muddy swamp slowing the wheels of the online world.

This has to stop.
 
2003-01-03 06:35:14 PM
Here's a statistic for ya folks...I work for a regional ISP in Oregon...In Dec 02 our mailservers processed 5 million email messages...we blocked 31% as SPAM and still the crap gets into my mailbox over 100 per day.

If your an Outlook user...SpamNet by Cloudmark works pretty good.
 
2003-01-03 06:35:18 PM
So how much does it cost to sort junk mail that comes via snail mail?
 
2003-01-03 06:35:49 PM
it's just another excuse for the govt to put more controls on the internet and 'monitor usage' that much closer.

and anyone who takes 4.4 seconds to get rid of spam deserves to get it in the first place.
 
2003-01-03 06:36:11 PM
Love that HEADline...
 
2003-01-03 06:36:15 PM
I dislike spam as much as the next guy but this is a BS study with BS result numbers.
Just think of how much lost productivity is lost by employees blinking. How many times do you blink during an eight or nine hour workday?
 
2003-01-03 06:37:07 PM
Inexactitude does not damn the point:
There is a sh*tload out there.
 
2003-01-03 06:37:37 PM
Crap! how'd that happen? Maybe we Finns are idiots. Commence bashing, but over on the correct thread...

**slinks away
 
2003-01-03 06:38:12 PM
Spam is less of a problem in Europe? How the fark did they figure that out? Have they SEEN my inbox?
 
2003-01-03 06:38:22 PM
How much is Fark costing businesses in lost productivity...must be in the millions.

I spend more time Farking around than working...
 
2003-01-03 06:38:23 PM
If they wanna blame loss of productivity on spam, that's fine with me. Please don't take away my internet!
 
2003-01-03 06:38:33 PM
I wonder how much, in $$, productivity is lost by employees on FARK!!!!

Buhahahahaha!
 
2003-01-03 06:39:11 PM
Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam.
 
2003-01-03 06:39:12 PM
Shut...up. Yeah, i love it when i repeat the obvious. Duh.
 
2003-01-03 06:40:11 PM
*Who cares so long as the salaries of the presidents, the CEO's, and those of the board of directors remain the same, if not become larger? If you're wasting all your time looking up spam then you don't deserve your paycheck. If anything, you should lose $2500 per second you spend looking at spam. Don't give us that crap about spam being forced down your throats. This is America, a democracy. Nobody is forced to do anything.*

/ugh, my own sarcasm makes me want to puke.
 
2003-01-03 06:41:56 PM
Gmaki:

x(Farenheit) = y(Celcius) * 9/5 + 32

-40F = -40C.
 
2003-01-03 06:42:07 PM
I got a pop up for CNN when I went to go read the article.

SPAM SPAM SPAM!!
 
2003-01-03 06:42:10 PM
Too bad you can't mail back the spam to the spammers like you can use the prepaid postage envelopes to send coupons and other junk mail back to the snail mail guys.
 
2003-01-03 06:43:38 PM
B for Bullshiat.
 
2003-01-03 06:45:33 PM
i work for a small insurance company. somehow some spammer got a hold of our mail xchanger IP address. Even though it doesn't relay, he sends SO MUCH email to it, trying to relay it to you good people, that

(a) if i have logging turned on, it eats through a gig every couple hours, and
(b) our email messages are often delayed because my box is having to deal with tens of thousands of threads per second.

I often have to spend entire days wasting my time on the email server because of this shiatstain bastard. it has cost my company quite a bit in lost productivity, namely my time.

I imagine there are quite a few other companies with this same problem. God help them if they have their servers set to enable relaying!

kemmen
 
2003-01-03 06:45:53 PM
Corporate_Ameritron: Your right! it is.

Well, then, umm. SPAM IS BAD!
 
2003-01-03 06:46:22 PM
I do that too, ! :-D
 
2003-01-03 06:47:27 PM
I must be the guy running up the clock -- love the satisfaction of seeing "Yum, this spam is fresh" at SpamCop.
No, it ain't -- I'm just saying.
 
2003-01-03 06:51:09 PM
So...how much money did Spam MAKE for American businesses last year?

There is a balance with all things.

Dog vs Cat
God vs Gates
Poop vs Whipped Cream
Spam vs (what IS the opposite of Spam?)
 
2003-01-03 06:51:20 PM
Way to go dildos.
 
rpm
2003-01-03 06:52:50 PM
Kemmen So press "Unauthorized use of computer resources" charges. You have the connecting IP, do something about it.
 
2003-01-03 06:52:52 PM
Kemmen: What OS is your server running on? You could setup a simple firewall script to block any traffic coming from his IP address(es). Then they won't be eating up your logs or time.
 
2003-01-03 06:54:59 PM
Yeah...like anyone checking their email in the first place
is going to be doing any work for a few minutes...

-Hyatus
"da da da"
 
2003-01-03 06:55:02 PM
Death penalty to spammers.
 
rpm
2003-01-03 06:55:07 PM
Then they passed a law in Congress declaring unsolicited fax advertising illegal. Now it doesn't happen anymore.

So what's that junk by the fax then?
 
2003-01-03 06:58:29 PM
But in future calculations, Nelson said he may have to add the costs of wireless spam, a growing problem in Europe as text messaging gets more popular.
This can be solved by simply adding a feature to only allow text messages from known persons. Unless you've got your cell or SMS address posted on the Internet or other public place, there shouldn't be a need for random strangers to be sending you text messages.
 
2003-01-03 06:58:52 PM
I didn't read all posts yet, but did anyone ask how much surfing porn at work cost businesses in 2002?

How about how much surfing Fark.com at work cost?

HMMMMMMMMMNNNNNNN?

;)

(not that I care...)
 
2003-01-03 07:00:38 PM
RPM if a Fax isnt specifically requested its termed "junk fax" and illegal. Press charges, make money, retire early, go to DisneyLand!
 
2003-01-03 07:01:46 PM
Leave it to Farkers to actually *defend* a practice as irritating, annoying, and costly as spam. In the end, the price you pay for your internet connection can be directly related to the aggregate bandwidth wasted across the net by these spamming sons-of-biatches. In my opinion, every person who knowingly sends multiple unsolicited e-mails should be shot in the mouth with a ball of their own shiat, once for every message sent!
 
Displayed 50 of 97 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report