Spam is killing the planet

By my own jiggey-pokery calculations i have determined that Flash adds eat up twice as many kilowatt hours and that shockingly there also not going anywhere fast.

Surely the saving is only made if the spam is stopped at, or near the source. If the spam filter is local then the energy to transmit it and to retreive it has already been used. The spam filter would only then be an addition energy use after the fact. So we should filter spam as it's not green.

Let's get rid of all the crap websites like Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, etc. Then let's get rid of eCommerce, I mean, we have B&M stores which function well. Hell, let's just get rid of the Internet. But wait, if we got rid of any technology at all we won't have any global warming at all.

Wait, apparently all of the Cows in India are causing global warming as well. So now we have to be technology-less herbivoirs... but we can't eat plants, they reduce CO levels. Guess we're all doomed to die...

i remember the time when there was no Ads on internet pages.. Oh my the internet was fast on my brand new 28k modem, now we have 10mbits and its still slow to display pages! get rid of em, ..
and for the mail spammer, Easy : tracked them and give them fines.. and if theyre hosted in corea or some place that dont give a damn about internet scumbag, then force their government to take legal action... if not we cut the entire country from the rest of the net..

===
p.s.
@ Dan,

by the sound of your sarcasm, you are FOR Spamming?, shame on you!
--------

How about the huge amount of energy needed for the CPU/memory/disk that struggle to deal with the system clogging/bloating common to overprotective products like McAfee and Symantec?

They check every single file again and again displaying their flashy message boxes all the time, monitor every TCP port and pretty much everything going on.

But can do nothing about users who don't have a clue about common sense when clicking their mouses, and most will end up paying for a full system cleanup every now and again. Then they upgrade to the next version of their so-called antivirus that claim to catch pests even harder than before.

Now that's a waste of energy.

You receive spam just like everyone else, so by your own accusation you must have entered your email into a porn site.

That was pretty stupid of you, wasn't it?

The documentary included...

"Porn leaves you hanging for more, for you to keep moving on to the next picture, so there's no satisfaction really."

My conclusion...

"It strings you along as an addiction. Addictions like smoking was more directly death dealing by the act, later was found to spread to second parties. Now hot smoking porn flames and burns everybody, in the carbon footprint arena as it is doing in others as well."

Spam is directly connected to porn, while world leaders [in incidence related to the liberal decadence] did instruct the masses, "it's business as usual". I could not believe my ears hearing a deliberate public hit on the snooze alarm!

The lucrative nature of Spam must be disrupted, even sending it underground may help, of course an out of site out of mind approach does not fix the whole problem entirely but this step is resisted maybe because of a natural drive to curtail liberalism hypocrisy. The industry is all over this to further it's purpose, using guilt by stretching associations in the markets as a defence.

The question would now be, would second hand smoke blown deliberately in your face makes you a smoker? Same for Spam and porn!

The smoking laws in place has had a positive effect and even with the resulting underground facts sent the smokers packing.