No, the title of this post does not mean that I've joined either the Creationist or ID camps. However, spammers certainly seem to be an evolutionary step backwards. It's a shame spamming doesn't give one leprosy. At least that would reduce their chances of reproducing.
"They may've signed up for the service to stay free of unsolicited e-mail, but people in Blue Security's "Do Not Intrude Registry" are getting spammed, the company said Wednesday."
One of my addresses has been one of those victimized. !@#$ wretched villainous scum. I wonder what kind of penance I'd get for castrating someone with a dull spoon…
Update 05/06/06: Here's a timeline of PharmaMaster's attack on Blue Security and members of its community.
"Everything was fine with our system until the power grid was shut off by d***less here."
Funky Dung
Comments 8
If spammers reproduce more than the rest of the population, then they are a step forward in evolution, insofar as anything is a step "forward".
People often impose their own aesthetics in judging "fitness", especially eugenicists, but if you can pop out more kids than the Joneses next door, and your kids in turn can reproduce, you are more evolutionarily fit than the Joneses. It doesn't matter if you have an IQ of 80, and eventually develop rheumatoid arthritis and obesity, if you pass on your genes, you "win".
Ergo, Darwinism has nothing against spammers per se, which may send some computer users to the ID camp. Scratch that–ID'ers have to account for what sort of perverse intelligence would create such a subspecies. Nope, it's back to Nature red in tooth a claw. Happy spamming.
+0
Posted 04 May 2006 at 4:38 pm ¶Perhaps it is not the spammers, but the people who actually send them money who are as step backward. Who are those people! And why don't their friends tell them the organ enlargment products probably don't work!!!
+0
Posted 04 May 2006 at 6:35 pm ¶Fess up, advogado, you're bitter cuz you wasted money on Enzyte.
+0
Posted 04 May 2006 at 6:51 pm ¶Actually advogado, if you used any "enhancements", puh-LEASE don't fess up! TMI, dude!
+0
Posted 04 May 2006 at 8:51 pm ¶LOL
I could respond to that, but can't figure out how to do it without breaking commenting guidline #5.
FYI…my girlfriend didn't seem to think http://getbreastsuccess.com/ was a romantic gift.
Spammers 2 Advogado 0
+0
Posted 04 May 2006 at 11:08 pm ¶Spammers, like rats and roaches, are, I'd contend, *more* evolutionarily fit.
+0
Posted 05 May 2006 at 6:40 am ¶Penance? Why nothing but an eternity of eating nothing but raw, cold SPAM in a can with a dull spoon
+0
Posted 05 May 2006 at 2:41 pm ¶It's always easier to get forgiveness than permission, Mr. Dung.
+0
Posted 07 May 2006 at 12:43 pm ¶Post a Comment