That’s your worst-case scenario, right? Minors with ready access to vanilla photographs of naked people, on above-board commercial websites? So what. Tell me this abusive horseshit is the only way to stop that and I’ll still reject this abusive horseshit.
The pearl-clutching horrors imagined by conservative dullards are a mundane experience for millions of people, and relatively few of them become dog-fuckers or axe-murderers. Almost like a healthy libido is normal and 18 isn’t the day you take the shrink-wrap off your genitals.
Teenagers masturbating is a non-event. It’s as unremarkable and unpreventable as atomic decay. It will happen. Do you want it to happen to whatever quasi-erotica passes through the filter? Bugs Bunny in drag, beach volleyball, that one episode of their favorite show where everybody shrinks? Shoddy AOL filters probably made more furries than Disney ever did. AI’s gonna twist kids right up. Tell me with a straight face that’s better than real photos of fake tits.
By all means, keep actual smut off broadcast TV. Expect websites to put the weird stuff behind warnings. Don’t sell porn to minors. But if your website doesn’t take a credit card to visit, hey guess what, anyone can see it, and anyone will. Oh well. People who think that’s the end of the world are lunatics who mean it literally.
The first "porn" I saw was in middle school. It was a single bootable floppy disk with a pitiful menu of crude -- almost repulsive -- animations on an Apple II, basically no better than stick figures. The lesson I took away from it? How to program animations on an Apple II. And also that using one-voice beeps and honks over a bitbang speaker to suggest the buildup to an orgasm is hilarious.
Disposable mails (one time mails) can be a problem for webmasters. But PRIVACY mails or ALIAS mails is PERMANENT addresses. So there is no way that they would be deleted at no additional situation. They gonna be deleted only if webmaster send SPAM or got data leak.
If you will use such addresses as disposable you will be simply banned (there is written in ToS)
Ironically, when I tried setting a ProtonMail account recovery email address, they rejected it because it was on a list like this one. I hope Proton gets off this blacklist, but I also think they should practice what they preach.
A lot of sites are willing to have something that’s good enough, rather than perfect, so if they find that using a list like this solves the majority of their abuse/deliverability issues, it’s unfortunately pretty logical they’d use it for that.
It is logical that large corporations that base their economy on surveillance advertising hate users who protect their privacy by using all kinds of dirty tricks to bypass or eliminate these protections… Luckily I have had no problems so far with the Proton, Tuta and Murena (NextCloud) emails that I use in the EU.
I saw the other day Tuta complaining that Outlook has been sending emails from tutanota.com straight to junk/spam. What’s surprising is tuta.com emails were fine. So not sure if their domain change had anything to do with it, or if MS is doing the same thing as in the OP.
Blacklists like these aggressively and unapologetically collect all privacy-focused email domains they find, including simple forwarding and tagging services. With more and more sites using these lists to reject or black-hole email addresses, it has become difficult to protect one’s self from spam and cross-site account tracking.
Dear web developers, please don’t use these lists. Well-intended or not, they are privacy and user-hostile.
Devs can use them to block DISPOSABLE mails, not PRIVACY legitimate emails. That’s why it is critical to remove privacy oriented email domains from such lists
I’m okay with people using burner email addresses to get my free content, I just need to be able to filter them out of my list so it doesn’t drive up bounces and hurt deliverability.
AWS SES, for example, is fucking rabid about bounces. Being able to filter out addresses you know are going to bounce is pretty important.
Can a list like this be used for anti-privacy measures? Absolutely! Does that mean we should never create lists like this? For me that depends on whether or not you think we should prevent encryption because bad actors can use it for bad purposes.
You’re getting into very sketchy territory by saying a dev who is using a public GitHub repo to solve their problems needs to take it down because of how others are abusing it. Should the original dev be punished by their email provider because they shouldn’t be allowed to use this? Should anything that has potential harm be required to be a private repo? Who gets to decide all of that?
In the interest of specifics, can you point to where this specific list has done harm? I spent a fair amount of time looking around to make sure I wasn’t going out on a limb for someone with neutral views.
You’re getting into very sketchy territory by saying a dev who is using a public GitHub repo to solve their problems needs to take it down
No, I don’t believe I said any such thing. Since you mention it, though, I think taking this list down and removing the false positives before bringing it back up would be the responsible thing to do.
In the interest of specifics, can you point to where this specific list has done harm?
I know from personal experience and investigation (both as a user and on the admin side) that there are now many cases of privacy-focused email addresses being rejected, or even worse, accepted and then silently black-holed, due to the domains being inappropriately added to lists like this one. I don’t know of a place where people report such cases so they can be documented in aggregate, but if I find one, I’ll be sure to bookmark it in case your question comes up again in the future.
So you’re lumping this resource into a bucket with other resources that were malicious but you have no direct connection from this resource to harm you claim it causes? You’re saying a dev using this list to allow people to download free content but prune emails to save his bounce rate is doing bad things and needs to convert their FOSS use-case to yours?
Who gets to decide? You didn’t answer that and in the interest of good faith I’ll pull that one down as the important one since it follows from the argument I feel you’re making.
You’ve ignored my questions attempting to flesh out your point and refuse to link this specific list to anything bad. I don’t think you understand good or bad faith. Good luck with that!
I feel like having different attributes for each domain might be helpful so that those services using the list can filter for just the things they care about such as burner emails, anonymous registration, whether it requires any email/phone verification, etc. Right now domains kind of have the problem of just being on the list or not, with no indication on why they might be a problem.
The beauty of open source code is that you can fork this project and add that. The repo maintainer seems to have a simple litmus test for whether or not something should be on the list: is it something that will cause a bounce for email distribution? That’s a really subjective test so you kinda have to talk to the repo maintainer about answering it. I suspect they feed it into a library, perhaps one of the ones linked, for use with their platform, so their problem is most likely solved.
Thanks to everyone for replying! I have decided to stick with brave for now since after an update to the flatpak the thing’s font is back to readable again.
privacy
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.