Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
1–10 of 12 posts
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#2I dont mind.
I dont mind that opening email on my top of the line laptop is 5 second process just to view the list of emails, and another 5 seconds for anything on the page to become responsive to clicks.
I dont mind that when email notification shows on my phone, I cant make one of the buttons in notification "mark as read", and have to go trough loops of setting up a google script running every minute that scans my email, and moves all unopened archived emails to Inbox while marking them as read, so avaiable "Archive" button can work as "Mark as read".
I dont mind I have to look where they moved "new email" button this time.
I dont mind that I will now start getting spam emails I cant filter.
I dont mind... Ill be using different email provider soon, and the above are main reasons why.
I wonder if Google is now wilfully on the path to kill the email. It must cost them much, and probably doesnt bring much options of direct monetization, so screw it, eh?
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#3What's the source on Google proposing it to the FEC? As far as I've read, FEC wrote it in a way that all large email providers have to follow, Google just happens to be one. Have I missed something?
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#4Google engineers can’t even figure out that email composed by Google, sent by Google, and specifically signed up for by the user is not spam…
Worse, they have designed a system where their own email not just marked as spam, but as phishing.
Repeatedly. Multiple instances per week. Ongoing for years.
I guess they can make it worse, but they don’t seem to have the talent onboard to make it better.
Imagine the level of hubris needed to be as arrogant as they are, and yet so incompetent.
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#5“Our observations in §4.1 to answer Q1 revealed that all SFAs exhibited political biases in the months leading upto the 2020 US elections. Gmail leaned towards the left (Democrats) whereas Outlook and Yahoo leaned towards the right (Republicans). Gmail marked 59.3% more emails from the right candidates as spam com- pared to the left candidates, whereas Outlook and Yahoo marked 20.4% and 14.2% more emails from left candidates as spam com- pared to the right candidates, respectively.”
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#6FEC's draft advisory opinion:
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#7The email spam filter I want:
if sender not in contacts: delete(message)
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#8My gmail account is very old (got it quite early in the beta phase). Recently it gets flooded with very easy to filter spam: no text, only an image from a randomly generated one-time email address. If they can't filter such an easy class then don't hold out much hope for the future.
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#9I dont mind. I dont mind that opening email on my top of the line laptop is 5 second process just to view the list of emails, and another 5 seconds for anything on the page to become responsive to clicks. I dont mind that when email notification shows on my phone, I cant make one of the buttons in notification "mark as read", and have to go trough loops of setting up a google script running every minute that scans my…
>I wonder if Google is now wilfully on the path to kill the $product. It must cost them much, and probably doesnt bring much options of direct monetization, so screw it, eh?
Their search, both on YouTube and Google.com is getting worse by the day. Their spam filter on Gmail is garbage (I'm getting your "bill is due" fake emails and spam with eggplants emojis right on my inbox).
Re: Gmail gets approval to move forward with plan to ruin its spam filter
#10Is there a public git repo that lists all the email campaign providers that are sending these emails and that lists their sending domains, AS numbers and CIDR blocks?
Another question just started rattling around in my head. How do the senders determine the valid and verified email addresses of US citizens? Are they buying lists or are people knowingly opting into this system? Or are they just pulling in email addresses from disparate government databases? Are they using data in ID.me? [1]
Also, is this assured to be a bi-directional communication or is this just a broadcast to the citizens? If I reply will it be to a "noreply@" address? Will these politicians enter into a forum and be open to unscripted and uncensored real time conversations? If it's a broadcast then could it not just be a Twitter feed that optionally links to a vlog post? If this must be targeted to individuals, then is this by chance a reaction to incidents like the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal? [2]
My personal preference would be that politicians just have their own Youtube/Bitchute/Rumble/other channels and let their messages grow organically and let people subscribe to them. If legal to do so they could even monetize the channel to pay for their campaigns. The more popular they are with their constituents, the more ad revenue they make.
[1] - https://id.me/
[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Ana...