Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Throwaway – open-source disposable email checker and API

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: Show HN: Throwaway – open-source disposable email checker and API

#11

Post by weddpros »

redeeman wrote: post #9

> Why 0.1% false positives are acceptable: Disposable email signups are low-quality. A false positive means one legitimate user retries with a different address — a minor inconvenience. False negatives (letting disposables through) are the real problem, and bloom filters guarantee zero false negatives. this typical insane techbro considerations, would rather inconvenience REAL potential customers, than a TINY inconve…

Let me explain: I'm operating a free cyber security service and 22% of users use a disposable emails. 22% of emails bouncing is not a TINY inconvenience. Hackers using my service incognito isn't a TINY inconvenience. If you're hiding your identity, I can't offer a safer internet to everyone.

I respect your disgust, and I feel the same towards your entitlement and presumptions.

I'll fix the percentage, it's 0.01%.

Re: Show HN: Throwaway – open-source disposable email checker and API

#12

Post by weddpros »

prody wrote: post #10

You've developed a tool to stop people from protecting themselves online. You should not be proud of it.

As I've said in another comment, I'm offering a free cyber security assessment tool online and 22% of people use a disposable address, meaning they remain anonymous yet they have me scan the internet for vulnerabilities. They're not protecting themselves from me, they're protecting themselves from the consequences of their actions.

You could have asked me what reasonable use cases exist.

There are extremely valid use cases for anonymity in B2C, most likely none in B2B.

Re: Show HN: Throwaway – open-source disposable email checker and API

#14

Post by prody »

weddpros wrote: post #12
prody wrote: post #10

You've developed a tool to stop people from protecting themselves online. You should not be proud of it.

As I've said in another comment, I'm offering a free cyber security assessment tool online and 22% of people use a disposable address, meaning they remain anonymous yet they have me scan the internet for vulnerabilities. They're not protecting themselves from me, they're protecting themselves from the consequences of their actions. You could have asked me what reasonable use cases exist. There are extremely valid use…

Killing people on death row is legal in some states. One should still not be proud of making weapons. I maintain my original statment: you should not be proud of what you did. Downvote me all you like.

Re: Show HN: Throwaway – open-source disposable email checker and API

#16

Post by redeeman »

weddpros wrote: post #11
redeeman wrote: post #9

> Why 0.1% false positives are acceptable: Disposable email signups are low-quality. A false positive means one legitimate user retries with a different address — a minor inconvenience. False negatives (letting disposables through) are the real problem, and bloom filters guarantee zero false negatives. this typical insane techbro considerations, would rather inconvenience REAL potential customers, than a TINY inconve…

Let me explain: I'm operating a free cyber security service and 22% of users use a disposable emails. 22% of emails bouncing is not a TINY inconvenience. Hackers using my service incognito isn't a TINY inconvenience. If you're hiding your identity, I can't offer a safer internet to everyone. I respect your disgust, and I feel the same towards your entitlement and presumptions. I'll fix the percentage, it's 0.01%.

i am not entitled, however, you are still punishing real users to catch those that are not your users.

even more, your false sense of security here makes it WAY worse, we just saw how someone was able to find a service you didnt catch in almost no time. in addition to that, are you willing to block @gmail, @protonmail or those? which you can sign up with in NO time. essentially your disposable email filter doesnt help you AT ALL stop someone that has even the tiniest of motivation to sign up without giving their real email address.

Just be aware that you are choosing to do actions that are roughly equivalent to what dvd manufacturers do, with unskippable intros telling you to not be a pirate, while the pirates just get contents without this.

Re: Show HN: Throwaway – open-source disposable email checker and API

#17

Post by [deleted] »

redeeman wrote: post #16
weddpros wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me explain: I'm operating a free cyber security service and 22% of users use a disposable emails. 22% of emails bouncing is not a TINY inconvenience. Hackers using my service incognito isn't a TINY inconvenience. If you're hiding your identity, I can't offer a safer internet to everyone. I respect your disgust, and I feel the same towards your entitlement and presumptions. I'll fix the percentage, it's 0.01%.

i am not entitled, however, you are still punishing real users to catch those that are not your users. even more, your false sense of security here makes it WAY worse, we just saw how someone was able to find a service you didnt catch in almost no time. in addition to that, are you willing to block @gmail, @protonmail or those? which you can sign up with in NO time. essentially your disposable email filter doesnt hel…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN