Paul Tenny explained:
understood. It is going to take a combination of factors to take out spammers. I have a couple in my back pocket I will reveal with camram 0.2. Some of the others proposed will also help by attacking other weak parts of the spammer equation.Please pardon me for jumping in on a conversation that I have definitely not kept up with in any way, but I have something to add here. Spamming is a business. Not all of them are people of low intelligence and not all of them are one man operations. Not all of them are running on financial fumes.
I do believe the cost was somewhere in the range of $15,000 - $20,000 for thewe did talk about that earlier and the advantage is always in the hands of the distributed network. unfortunately, I can't locate the posting in the archives. In any case, the basic line of thought was it a spammer does it brute force/bloody ignorance with specialized hardware, Taiwan Inc. can replicate the work cheaper and faster, put it on every motherboard and a bunch of PCI cards for the earlier motherboards which means there'll be a big jump in the cost of postage and we're back at square one with the spammers still losing[1].
hardware and they were blowing away PC clusters with nodes well over 200.
Because these chips don't have anywhere near the transistor count of a PC
processor they didn't generate anywhere near the equivalent amount of heat.
Their performance simply wasn't tied to the clock cycle like PC processors are.
That's a small price to pay, and that was back in the late 90's.
If the idea here is to cause penalty for sending email (doesn't matter in
what way), it's fundamentally flawed. Whatever the software does, it has to
run on a processor of some sort, and not necessarily the kind you want it to
be run on. Linear speed is not always going to be a limiting factor.