Document:Q9887

Spam often arrives (usually the email equivalent of junk mail) hundreds a day. There are countless programs and email techniques to "block" spam, however some always gets through. The sheer numbers make it impossible to control. Once the junk mail arrives, the task is not complete. Marketing people, psychologists and hi-end internet programmers, brainstorm ways to get recipients to actually open these sales solicitations.
The companies sending junk messages regularly use methods far beyond the capabilities of most recipients, even most programmers. Why? Surely, if the recipients simply do not want these messages, why would anyone go to ridiculous lengths to trick those same recipients into opening them?
In this piece, the user enters an email address (preferably their own) sends 15 junk messages from the address submitted. the subjects also contain the email account name with one of 200+ unpredictable spoof subjects. for example: "hey jdoe, earn viagra working from home". These are common techniques that have traditionally been used by spammers and prank spoofers.
So, what exactly differentiates this, by calling it "art". rather than admit spam is annoying, does this justify "free speech"? can the point of censorship both be to stifle voices AND eliminate ideological camouflage/noise that prevents people from seeing clearly. Certainly there would be no windshield wipers on cars, if not for censorship.
Once opened, the body of the emails question the very use of email, when one is never sure which to read. Why do people choose to make it increasingly impossible or impractical to sort the important information from the trivial sales pitches. by rendering email ultimately less useful, isn't that just like setting your own boat afire mid-sea?
Is email gradually destroying the use for email itself, to result in us abandoning the desire for email. Or are the sensory and cognitive features that appear unique to humans paradoxically an ever-evolving filtering system, unaware of our surroundings. Perhaps, (completely and subjectively measured according to a human perspective and expectation of brain functions) the cockroach's neural capacity limited using that scale, though may be far more aware of what we are not.