Comments on: Spammers thrive despite 0.00000008% response rate http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2008/11/10/spammers-thrive-despite-000000008-response-rate/ Technology news Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:03:28 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: John Pospisil http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/11/10/spammers-thrive-despite-000000008-response-rate/comment-page-1/#comment-145117 John Pospisil Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:43:05 +0000 http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2008/11/10/spammers-thrive-despite-000000008-response-rate/#comment-145117 It's tragic that despite the poor response rate, there's still enough incentive for spammers to spend their time spamming, filling our in boxes with crap. I'd love to find out what kind of people get suckered by these emails -- you'd think by now most people would know clicking on links in SPAM is a bad idea. It’s tragic that despite the poor response rate, there’s still enough incentive for spammers to spend their time spamming, filling our in boxes with crap.

I’d love to find out what kind of people get suckered by these emails — you’d think by now most people would know clicking on links in SPAM is a bad idea.

]]> By: DavidB http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/11/10/spammers-thrive-despite-000000008-response-rate/comment-page-1/#comment-145021 DavidB Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:35:34 +0000 http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2008/11/10/spammers-thrive-despite-000000008-response-rate/#comment-145021 Doesn't anyone ELSE read this story and wonder why they didn't hack the whole bot net at the end of their "study" and crash the whole thing? Doesn’t anyone ELSE read this story and wonder why they didn’t hack the whole bot net at the end of their “study” and crash the whole thing?

]]>