and thanks to google's spam blocker i only had to remove about 10 spams from my inbox this year. thank you google team for making gmail an almost spam free environment.
Yes, the spam filter seems pretty good. I seem to get about as many spam messages as real mail, even after McColo. Yet only a few percent of them get into my regular mail. I do lose a number of mailing list emails to the spam filter on occasion and very rarely a piece of legitimate mail. Maybe there will still be further improvments possible. Maybe these is a way to mark the mailing list maiing as legitimate that I don't know about.
Agree with other comments - unbelievably effective spam block for Gmail. This to me is the biggest best and by far most important reason to use the service. The fact that it is better than its competition in other ways as well is just icing on the spam-free cake...
You guys rock this world. Without Gmail's spam protection, countless hours of productivity would be lost world-wide. I'm not being sarcastic, I really mean that.
I highly doubt that spam contributes to a significant portion of the CO2 produced every day. And neither would an individual spam have a surprising amount of CO2 either; quoting the top of the article: spam is a `2 billion enterprise email connections per day`
However, the point has been raised that resources are being needlessly expended.
To develop the question, how much does the INTERNET cost to run? What is the CO2 expenditure per day/hour? Will the next target of the green groups possibly be the regulation of cyberspace? Will it become just another thing for the government to tax?
Well I dont think Google is blocking the spams efficiently. The Spam filter should be more transparent and should be customizable by the end users. Unless they do that, they cant give 100% protection from spam !
According to California legislators (http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca.shtml) spam cost United States organizations alone more than ten billion dollars a year back in 2003. Computer security systems (anti-virus, anti-malware, anti-spam, etc.) are very resource-intensive. The human resources expended dealing with it are also resource-intensive. These costs dwarf the cost of transmission and storage of the spam. The CO2 cost is large, but I can't give you a better answer.
Any ideas how to block spam from these somewhat dubious foreign websites purporting to sell prescription medicines? That and the websites selling bogus degrees, etc?
Agreed. I deleted a spam email out of my inbox this morning, and I don't REMEMBER the last time I had to do that. I have never lost a piece of legit mail to the spam filters, and I appreciate that Gmail doesn't expose my computer to potentially harmful viruses; considering many spammers send an email with a name in the "sender" line, as opposed to a company, like the emails I get from the Playbill Club have their company name in the sender line. I most likely would open a spam email without knowing it was spam and my computer probably would be toast by now considering the amount of spam mail I recieve! Thanks Gmail!
Can you evaluate the energy wasted by spam ? Or the average CO2 cost for 1 spam ?
ReplyDeleteDamn the spam!!
ReplyDeleteand thanks to google's spam blocker i only had to remove about 10 spams from my inbox this year. thank you google team for making gmail an almost spam free environment.
ReplyDeleteand thanks to the google team i had to deal with only 10 spams this year. thank you google team for making gmail such a spam free place to be!
ReplyDeleteYes, the spam filter seems pretty good. I seem to get about as many spam messages as real mail, even after McColo. Yet only a few percent of them get into my regular mail. I do lose a number of mailing list emails to the spam filter on occasion and very rarely a piece of legitimate mail. Maybe there will still be further improvments possible. Maybe these is a way to mark the mailing list maiing as legitimate that I don't know about.
ReplyDeleteAgree with other comments - unbelievably effective spam block for Gmail. This to me is the biggest best and by far most important reason to use the service. The fact that it is better than its competition in other ways as well is just icing on the spam-free cake...
ReplyDeleteYou guys rock this world. Without Gmail's spam protection, countless hours of productivity would be lost world-wide. I'm not being sarcastic, I really mean that.
ReplyDeleteGoogle's spam protection is nothing short of amazing. In fact, I get far more unsolicited phone calls than spam emails now.
ReplyDeleteHey, there's a business idea... figure out how to block my spammy phone calls too!
the best spam technology is with google compared to the leading emails such as hotmail, yahoo, rediffmail etc, no doubt about it
ReplyDeleteI would not be surprised to hear that the energy wasted by spam would be relatively small.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, quoting from the top of the article:
spam is `2 billion enterprise email connections per day`.
However, the point has been raised that this is a place in the world that resources are needlessly being expended.
To develop the question further, how much CO2 does the internet cost to run every day?
I highly doubt that spam contributes to a significant portion of the CO2 produced every day. And neither would an individual spam have a surprising amount of CO2 either; quoting the top of the article: spam is a `2 billion enterprise email connections per day`
ReplyDeleteHowever, the point has been raised that resources are being needlessly expended.
To develop the question, how much does the INTERNET cost to run? What is the CO2 expenditure per day/hour? Will the next target of the green groups possibly be the regulation of cyberspace? Will it become just another thing for the government to tax?
I'll concur with the rest of 'em, Google. I work in IT Security for a different organization and have ALWAYS been amazed by your filters.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work, guys. You set the bar for the rest of us.
Well I dont think Google is blocking the spams efficiently. The Spam filter should be more transparent and should be customizable by the end users. Unless they do that, they cant give 100% protection from spam !
ReplyDeleteAccording to California legislators (http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca.shtml) spam cost United States organizations alone more than ten billion dollars a year back in 2003. Computer security systems (anti-virus, anti-malware, anti-spam, etc.) are very resource-intensive. The human resources expended dealing with it are also resource-intensive. These costs dwarf the cost of transmission and storage of the spam. The CO2 cost is large, but I can't give you a better answer.
ReplyDeleteAny ideas how to block spam from these somewhat dubious foreign websites purporting to sell prescription medicines? That and the websites selling bogus degrees, etc?
ReplyDeleteTremendous work!
ReplyDeleteOne can now use e-mail services with renewed confidence and less fear of an overloaded in box full of junk mail and other pests.
i <3 Gmail
ReplyDeleteYes, great work on the antispam email filters, works great! Almost nothing makes it through.
ReplyDeleteHey Google! We love you!
ReplyDelete@Bruce
ReplyDeleteThere's a never mark as spam filter option, you can use that on your mailing lists.
I love you guys ... get 'em up !!!
ReplyDeleteI really, *really* wish these graphs were available somewhere in a regularly updated format.
ReplyDeleteEach megabyte sent over the internet takes the energy of a lump of charcoal:
ReplyDeleteSee time marker 6:15.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jay_walker_s_library_of_human_imagination.html
Agreed. I deleted a spam email out of my inbox this morning, and I don't REMEMBER the last time I had to do that. I have never lost a piece of legit mail to the spam filters, and I appreciate that Gmail doesn't expose my computer to potentially harmful viruses; considering many spammers send an email with a name in the "sender" line, as opposed to a company, like the emails I get from the Playbill Club have their company name in the sender line. I most likely would open a spam email without knowing it was spam and my computer probably would be toast by now considering the amount of spam mail I recieve! Thanks Gmail!
ReplyDelete