Yes, that's exactly why it happens. I just found it amusing that there would be so many.
I personally find it more likely (at least in this case) that it's a bandwidth decision on Amazon's part - why send out millions of images when you can just as easily send a url? I can see, however, that more underhanded people may be interested in watching their messages travel around the world. I can't see whyyou'd be interested, but I can see that they would.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-06-01 10:27 am (UTC)I personally find it more likely (at least in this case) that it's a bandwidth decision on Amazon's part - why send out millions of images when you can just as easily send a url? I can see, however, that more underhanded people may be interested in watching their messages travel around the world. I can't see whyyou'd be interested, but I can see that they would.
Why I care
Date: 2005-06-01 10:32 am (UTC)Re: Why I care
Date: 2005-06-01 10:58 am (UTC)Though I didn't think spambots cared whether an email address was valid or not ... surely they just ignore bounces?
Re: Why I care
Date: 2005-06-01 11:21 am (UTC)