Guaranteed to be a long response, so if you aren’t up to reading something long & boring, stop now. I will assert there aren’t any bits & bytes, so it should be pretty accessible. (If anything is incorrect, please let me know. I hate using a dictionary or encyclopedia.)
First, there are no perfect methods in any type of blocking certain things. The harder you try, the more delight some take to defeat systems. Companies spend a LOT of time trying to “protect” information such as music, movies, etc. If you can see it, and if you can feel it, it can be broken.
Suits would prefer this outlook to be suppressed because it looks like they’re telling everyone, “Come and get it!”
There are two methods of resolving (nor nearly so) spam in blogs:
1. Spam detector software
2. CAPTCHAs ( Completely Automatic Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart ). Let’s try to avoid using “CAPTCHA’s”.
The former has two methods: 1) use a service geared for it; 2) Use what’s known as a “Bayesian” detector/filter. Bayesian software works by being told what is spam and what is not. The more it’s used, the “smarter” it becomes.
If you want to sound impressive to others, Bayes was a Presbyterian minister … in the early 1700s. Kind of strange how a religious leader from 300 years ago has work which is important in today’s world. That overshadows another math wizard as Evariste Galois died in a (gun) feud (seriously) in the early 1800s, just a bit beyond the age of 20. His work continues to find more & more (and more) new ways to deal with his work.
CAPTCHAs are the funny little boxes with colors, hash marks, etc. which are intended to baffle software because people can read it and computers cannot. You just enter what you believe it to be and it compares with the web server.
I’ve pondered using either on a random basis. It won’t fix everything. But I’m just curious as to what happens.
CAPTCHAs aren’t foolproof. Some spamming services pay people to interpret them for a particular fee. (see “squat”) The desired message is pasted and submitted. One could think “manual spam.” But if sites are noted to have a particular “profile” which can be logged & used at will, I have no doubt this would be another way to compromise blogs automatically.
I’ve stepped back from the “anti” (anti-spam) and where blogging fits in. But there are two parties who can sue spammers: ISPs and SAGs (State Attorney General). You’d think it was taboo to do it. ISPs would definitely raise the profile of that ISP — potentially steal some customers with the knowledge they are going to (legally & financially) make someone pay. As for a SAG, it’s been interesting to see how elections are handled. The Indiana SAG spent the entire campaign bragging about what he’d done to support the DNC (Do Not Call) phone list. It’s more stringent than the federal level. Had he had the stones to do it, he would take on spammers. I don’t think people would look at the other candidates, as this alone would make people happy.
phil
