Spam

[Owen Lewis]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> [mailto:ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk]On Behalf Of Roland Perry
> Sent: 12 October 2002 11:30
> To: ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: Re: Spam
>
>
> In message <FMEFLOMOCGIMKOKKKLFIMEAFCGAA.oml@sysrx.uk.com>, Owen Lewis
> <oml@sysrx.uk.com> writes
>
> >> Indeed, but there is significant work (or indeed intellectual property)
> >> in collecting all that public information into a digestible and
> >> correlated report.
> >
> >What, all two of them :-)
>
> I think you'll find there are rather more than two courts at which you
> need to trawl through all their case reports! Organisations that produce
> a commercial product from the results deserve some recognition for the
> IPR.

Perhaps. It depends on the market value of the product.
>
> >Joking aside, were one to summon up the interest, a request to one's MP
> >would produce the required information. I simply wouldn't bet
> the ranch on
> >the future value of the relevant IPR.
>

[Requirement for NDA]

> In this instance, after a long face to face meeting with the folks
> concerned, I am convinced.

I can't imagine that I would be. What we are discussing are statistics for
charges, prosecutions and convictions.. I mentioned the matter of trade. In
this instance and from what has been put here, you accepted this information
under NDA so that you may profit from a resulting IPR. I do not inquire
further into that. The nagging question remains though, what do you give, or
are perceived to give in trade for the value received?

I'm sorry if that sounds personal; it is not meant so. There is an
underlying and interesting point of principle here.

> As you may surmise, there is considerable
> public (and indeed at least one MP) demand for ISPs to do something
> about 419 spam.

I come from just reading that a man had an expensive motorbike stolen from
his doorstep. He reported the theft within minutes of its occurrence. It was
24 hrs before the police (Met) could bother to take a statement of the
facts. After four more days of apparent police inaction, he decided to
search for the machine himself. He found it after just five hours of
enquiries on a local estate (stripped of over £1K of accessories). He
photographed those doing the stripping and paid a 'ransom' for to take the
machine away. The police recognised the individuals in the photos but have
taken no statements nor made arrests. A suggestion that the bike be
finger-printed was met with comment that it was a 'low priority'. And you
fancy the Met cleaning up Nigerian Scam?? I have not your faith (or
whatever).


> It's important that I'm able to put the matter in to complete perspective.

Perhaps to the owner of the IPR in a perspective. I prefer to remember that
perspective is not an absolute but is uniquely relative to the position of
the observer.

> >Then you can cite a case of cases in which it has been
> publicised? One notes
> >that the several paid-up journos here are remarkably silent ;-)
>
> Someone posted one yesterday.

David Biggins did indeed. However as a UKP 0.5M 'advance fee' hit, it does,
I think not belong in the same category as the average Nigerian Scam.
>
> >If one looks at the abduction and killing of children where there is no
> >extortion of ransom, then the police record is woefully short of 100%.
>
> Although none of the recent cases I can think of are in the Met's area
> (except perhaps that torso in the Thames, which they are very publically
> following up with great vigour).
>
> >This
> >is not a criticism of the police; they are not omnipotent. In such cases,
> >they are deprived of the most powerful tools that can come into play only
> >when ransom is demanded.
>
> Yes, the problem seems to be that missing teenagers aren't normally
> pursued for up to 14 days, whereas the moment there's a ransom demand
> it's immediate action stations.

Roland, that is so lame it *has* to have a police PR source. Wake up and
smell the coffee :-)

[Sarah Payne is perhaps the exception
> here]. What's even more interesting is why only a small percentage of
> such missing teenagers hit the news - one suspects that as with many
> crimes it depends how well dressed the person reporting it is.

The fact is that if a person with no relationship to a child of any age
chooses to abduct the child and later kill it, it may be an extraordinarily
difficult crime to solve. If in the same circumstances the perpetrator
demands (and accepts) a ransom - and if the police are informed - then what
was otherwise difficult is made very much easier.
>
> >However, it is also reasonable to expect that there are
> kidnappings where a
> >ransom is paid, the kidnappee returned and the kidnapper home free - all
> >without the police being informed. Naturally, such matters can't
> affect the
> >boast of 100%, can they??
>
> Statistics always include only what they include.

And hence the saying that there are 'Lies, damned lies and statistics'. You
may take your pick in which of these categories you believe the '100%
success rate in kidnapping' properly belongs.

Owen