h a l f b a k e r yI CAN HAZ CROISSANTZ?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
@
Personal E-mail addresses | |
Every person on the planet is given a number of personal e-mail addresses - These would be for Government Contacts (Tax, NI, Benefits), Legal Contacts, Family, Friends, SPAM, Interest. - These are guarenteed to stay with you for life and are guarenteed private (i.e. inadmisable in legal disputes, and
to avoid //Big Brother// issues).
Their incorrect use should be punishable by law. I.e. if a company sent SPAM to someone's "Personal" or "Family" address, their server would be automatically destroyed.
Each e-mail address might contain characters (c), (cc) or other to enable/disable copyright, and to disable addresses from being added to //opt-in// lists.
(I know this sounds very //Let's All// but I don't think it is... as these could be optional and Governement-run)
Identity 2.0
http://identity20.com/media/WEB2_2005/
Just on the subject of 'Identity' because that's the underlying topic. [Jinbish, Dec 13 2005]
Second social security number
Second_20social_20security_20number
Similar idea, but without the punishment. You could add your own favorite punishment, if you like. [bungston, Dec 14 2005]
No internet more anonymity -> no more privacy!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ID/10441443
[Dub, Dec 15 2005]
[link]
|
| |
What, the state doles you out email addresses like it gives you a National Insurance/Social Security number? |
|
| |
(Asides
1. The idea may benefit from a slightly less cryptic title.
2. Perhaps a sub-category of the computer heading may be more appropriate than the present one, which deals instead with your physical home letter/mailbox.
3. Welcome, [Parmenides], have you met [Aristotle]?) |
|
| |
2.I intended it to be a useful thing, not a hindrance or litigious thing - Not evil. I.e. like Gmail. A lot like a set of mail boxes. |
|
| |
3.No, but I know of Zeno. |
|
| |
1. Most intruiging title I've seen recently, I *had* to click it. |
|
| |
An interesting idea - maybe the address could be a compound of your name and birthdate: |
|
| |
james.a.wagstaff.09.08.73 @ everyone.un.org |
|
| |
That should take care of separating all the John Smiths. |
|
| |
Nice idea but multiple problems:
-Any scheme that generates enough unique addresses to give everyone worldwide multiple addresses will sacrifice readability and memorability:
"Thanks for your message 133aaab221221228al8@world.com"
- There's no way you can guarantee privacy. If they're ever used, they can be spammed and there's no way you can destroy a server that disappears the day after the offence was committed and then doesn't appear again under the same name.
In summary, nice idea but completely unworkable. |
|
| |
[DocBrown]Ah, that's what I was trying to get at with anti-opt-in character - e.g. if my e-mail address was XYZ982@private%UK (The % char -> no spam) and some company sent me spam to that address - When I reported that to the autorities, all e-mails which had the same origin would be ignored / the sender's server would be taken off the system, and possibly worse! |
|
| |
There are, around 6.7Billion people on Earth - That number in base 36 (0->9, A-Z) is less than 3ZZZZZ |
|
| |
Ah, privacy - That'd be a problem - but somehow (at the moment) most governments seem to (more or less) manage it. |
|
| |
until they start spamming you. |
|
| |
Nice point regarding the length of the address but I'm not sure you grasp the problem with this bit //the sender's server would be taken off the system//. How? What about a spammer using a legitimate ISP? How will you prevent servers from rejoining the network under new names with new IP addresses? |
|
| |
Likewise, I think this fails for the same reason the current anti-spam measures are failing. |
|
| |
And I really fail to see what use an email address is to the majority of the people on earth. |
|
| |
And it'll get kludgy when we have later have to make it backward-compatible with e-mail addresses on other planets. |
|
| |
[DocBrown]Some form of registry system (waves hands around meaningfully). This is The Half Bakery after all, isn't it? |
|
| |
I have probably 20 different yahoo e-mail addresses that I cooked up to get past phpbb forum bans. Flaming, ranting, you know, *my* kind of non sense. |
|
| |
I still can't remember any more than three of them (:), ). |
|
| |
Gmail is evil? since when? |
|
| |
[Eugene] No, no. //Not evil. I.e. like Gmail. // - Google famously has the fact that it mustn't be Evil in it's stated policy. (BTW I deleted an echo of your post) |
|
| |
[EvilPickels]I still remember the registration plate, engine and chassis number (VIN) of my dad's first car he'd bought in 1972! |
|
| |
You're proposing that an all-knowing, all-powerful, benevolent government eradicate spam for us. |
|
| |
We can identify spam now. I don't care whether it arrives at my work or my home address, it's still spam. If it were in "the government"'s power to economically punish the people who send it, don't you think that it would be done? |
|
| |
Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree; I'm actually not sure what the supposed benefit of these addresses is, and I'm just attacking the side benefit of guaranteed freedom from spam because that's the only point I see. Am I missing something? |
|
| |
//..don't you think that it would be done?//
Why is it currently in any government's interest to stop spam at the moment? Sure it upsets some people, but not enough for them (the Gov) to be too bothered about it. |
|
| |
However, it would however be very handy for them if each person had a guaranteed method of communication - It might prompt the UN to help install technology into some areas. Sure the areas are very poor, have no livestock or farming facilities, but there's people - and they have brains - Look what's happening in China and what has already happened in India? They're making money! [DrCurry] |
|
| |
Imagine if everyone was given a telephone number at birth, which was guaranteed always to get hold of them (assuming the person hadn't added you to their blocked list). |
|
| |
The aim was a reliable and guaranteed method of contacting someone. With built-in controls. OK, If you didn't want to be contacted, you just wouldn't apply for an account , or you wouldn't use it - but if you did, it'd save a lot of time for a lot of people. |
|
| |
I have several e-mail addresses for old friends who have moved away - They no longer use their old hotmail accounts, and I've lost touch with them - (Maybe they don't want me to keep in touch, I don't know!) but if, say, M$ didn't exist suddenly, lots and lots of people would be in the same boat. |
|
| |
The idea was that access could be controlled if you wanted it to be, and would be more permanent than trusting some business who might one day decide not to provide a free service or any service at all. |
|
| |
I remember a book I read by Robert A Heinlein, "For Us The Living"... in it, everyone had an unalienable right to a private a business sphere. Your job and such fell in the business sphere; everything else fell in your private sphere. The media was not allowed to report on anything in your private sphere, and it was not allowed in the code of customs for a business associate to look into your private sphere.
A great moment in the book is when the protagonist, while being filmed by a multitude of video cameras, yells "PRIVATE SPHERE!" and stopped all the cameras.
This idea seems very congruent to that - seperate, protected email addresses for each category of one's life. Good thinking, but for reasons already annotated, not easily feasible. Easily feasible - hehe. |
|
| |