Skip to main content

Is spamming really profittable?

Spam mails are everywhere and everyday. There is a question, "Is spamming really profitable?" One "academic" paper try to answer this question. They set up the bot net, set up fake web pages, send spam mails (350million spam emails in their experience), observe how many can go through, how many comes to the web page, and how many actually buy the medicine. This is the paper: Kanich et al. Spamalytics: an empirical analysis of spam marketing conversion. CASM, 2009, Vol.52, No.9, pp.99-107

I do not know how, but they claims it they cleared U.S. legal doctrine and ethics.

The authors said, "We would be the first to admit that these results represents a single data point and are not necessarily representative of spam as a whole." and they even said there is some danger to interpret the result's means. But, for 28 days experience, 350 million spam mails are sent, 82 million delivered (but, of course they do not know how many are shown up in user's inbox, most of them might be just filtered to the spam folder.), more than 10,000 web page visitors, and 28 purchased the medicine. The transaction was 2800 dollars. 100 dollars/day transaction. Their method only uses 1.5 % of the botnet ability, so, 7000 to 9500 dollars/day transaction are extrapolated. Of course there is a machine and human cost and also the business cost (if the spammer does the business) are not included, but, it could be profitable. This is an interesting paper.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why A^{T}A is invertible? (2) Linear Algebra

Why A^{T}A has the inverse Let me explain why A^{T}A has the inverse, if the columns of A are independent. First, if a matrix is n by n, and all the columns are independent, then this is a square full rank matrix. Therefore, there is the inverse. So, the problem is when A is a m by n, rectangle matrix.  Strang's explanation is based on null space. Null space and column space are the fundamental of the linear algebra. This explanation is simple and clear. However, when I was a University student, I did not recall the explanation of the null space in my linear algebra class. Maybe I was careless. I regret that... Explanation based on null space This explanation is based on Strang's book. Column space and null space are the main characters. Let's start with this explanation. Assume  x  where x is in the null space of A .  The matrices ( A^{T} A ) and A share the null space as the following: This means, if x is in the null space of A , x is also in the null spa

Gauss's quote for positive, negative, and imaginary number

Recently I watched the following great videos about imaginary numbers by Welch Labs. https://youtu.be/T647CGsuOVU?list=PLiaHhY2iBX9g6KIvZ_703G3KJXapKkNaF I like this article about naming of math by Kalid Azad. https://betterexplained.com/articles/learning-tip-idea-name/ Both articles mentioned about Gauss, who suggested to use other names of positive, negative, and imaginary numbers. Gauss wrote these names are wrong and that is one of the reason people didn't get why negative times negative is positive, or, pure positive imaginary times pure positive imaginary is negative real number. I made a few videos about explaining why -1 * -1 = +1, too. Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by pattern https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by climbing a mountain https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 But actually Gauss's insight is much powerful. The original is in the Gauß, Werke, Bd. 2, S. 178 . Hätte man +1, -1, √-1) nicht positiv, negative, imaginäre (oder gar um

Why parallelogram area is |ad-bc|?

Here is my question. The area of parallelogram is the difference of these two rectangles (red rectangle - blue rectangle). This is not intuitive for me. If you also think it is not so intuitive, you might interested in my slides. I try to explain this for hight school students. Slides:  A bit intuitive (for me) explanation of area of parallelogram  (to my site, external link) .