False Positives
According to this Breaking News from the local paper, our cable provider, Charter, has been filtering out notices from the public library:
Madison Public Library patrons who use a Charter e-mail address likely have not received any messages about books that have become overdue or hold requests that have been filled.
Librarians say that the problem lies with Charters spam filter. The automated messages sent from the library and its LINKcat online cataloguing system are blocked from those with e-mails ending with @charter.net.
“Charter servers see our e-mails as spam because so many e-mails are sent to Charter subscribers from our address,” a statement from the Madison Public Library said Monday.
“Our automation staff is working with Charter to resolve the problem.”Meanwhile, they recommend using an alternative e-mail address or, if necessary, temporarily signing up for phone notifications at a local branch.
False positives scare the hell out of me. We assume that those creating these algorithms know what they’re doing and thus have anticipated every circumstance. We need to be vigilant, especially when these algorithms are employed for reasons other than library notices: “I’m sorry sir, but your name appears on the no fly list. Please proceed behind this curtain. Oh? That sound? Just snapping latex, nothing to be worried about.”
December 19th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
You are a wise man Mr. Hand. If the average consumer only knew just how destructive the entire False Positive scenario is.
The fact is; most have no idea, and I don’t understand how to get them to care. It seems as thought so many individuals sit on the sidelines and just give it the old “Oh well?”
For example: This entire Image Spam issue is one more example of how customers are being abused in their “owned” space. (and I did use the correct verb). You do “own” your digital space and you should not be responsible for the cost of cleaning up abuse. In our physical life, if you abuse someone’s property you are fined Well, your digital space should be no different and someone should implement a system that gives you the same abilities.
(Now that you realize the cost of not checking your spam folder - Think of how bad this problem will be when spam hits your digital phone - and this is coming.)
I am quite passionate about this problem. So much so that I invented the revolutionary solution I suggested above. Given the power of the net it was not that difficult. The next problem - The world is not into “revolutionary”. So, I had to build the revolution into an anti-spam product and it is now sold with every unit we ship.
The goal being - to get enough of a consumer movement at hand to push ISPs and providers to enhance their existing anti-spam with what I’ve built.
The way I see it - Your digital contact points are your property. Just as Google, Amazon and Yahoo own their space - You should own yours. Giving consumers this granular power will address a broad range of abusive issues.
You can learn a bit more about it here:
December 19th, 2006 at 5:13 pm
Here’s todays bad news on this topic:
http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=41587&cid=10
December 20th, 2006 at 6:07 am
Ed,
I’ve an idea. First, consider this question:
Do you believe it is you (the email recipient) shouldering the cost of spam? If yes - Do you believe it should be this way?
If you answered yes to the above - Please write back to me when you see this message and use this address fjusp122006@vqme.com.
If you answered no - I am even more curious to reasoning - so if you like - write back anyway.