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

The Frustration Loop

herman.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 158 posts

Re: The Frustration Loop

#101

Post by jdthedisciple »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #28

The best spam protection I ever had, was a bunch of hidden text input fields on my mail contact form, with names like “blindcopy”, “bcc”, “cc”, “additional address”, etc. They all had default values. If the submitting handler detected any values in these fields that were different from the default, the submission was rejected. I don’t think I ever got a single bogus email from that form.

Doesn't even Hackernews employ something like this?

There are hidden input fields on the login page..

Re: The Frustration Loop

#102

Post by jstanley »

> In my tests I haven't managed to trigger it without explicitly performing a dodgy action.

But that just means it doesn't flag you. What is a "dodgy action"? Other people might do things that you think are dodgy, without any malicious intent at all. A common one: if I sign up using Tor, is that dodgy?

It is very frustrating to get caught in these frustration loops.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#103

Post by clnq »

Nevermark wrote: post #76

I came up with a simple way to eliminate spam in my email, without any third party filtering. I have my own domain name for email. My email box accepts anything that goes the domain. I.e. a catchall email account. However, I give a different email address to every site and service. I.e. sitea@mydomain.com, site2@mydomain.com This lets my email reliably get auto sorted by who its from. But I also use a consistent form…

I have a similar system. My domain is catch-all, but I give everyone a unique email address with a bit at the end of the alias to indicate what my email rules should do.

For example, if I get an email at anything_s@mydomain.com, that will go directly to spam. I use this for everything from Google to every small website I sign up on. They usually only spam anyways. And I check my spam every now and then for if there's anything important - there has never been.

I consider whatever most normal businesses send me spam as well, as I don't care for most of it. Uber Eats, for example, sends a number of emails per each order. That is just spam in my eyes. If I'll use a service I care about, I'll give it an email with a different alias suffix that will never go to spam. But I almost never do.

This has keep out the phishing spam when websites leak my email address just as well as the regular "important information about a minor interaction you did with us" spam that comes from most websites.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#105

Post by netmare »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #66
slater wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wtf?

Presumably one of the users who has personal experience with a false positive in one of these systems.

They were probably referring to the random delays, form field wiping, focus-jumping and silly back-end errors which are prevalent in "healthcare UI/UX".

Re: The Frustration Loop

#106

Post by jaggederest »

yowlingcat wrote: post #91
jaggederest wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of curiosity, how would you build a following if none of your videos ever receives any views? I'm not someone who uses the tikity tok but it seems like an intractable problem.

Leave noteworthy comments on other peoples videos, make noteworthy stitches of theirs. Embrace remix culture, essentially. It only seems like an intractable problem to non power users of social media.

What if those videos also receive no views? Serious question, I don't know how Tiktok works well enough to intuit.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#107

Post by jcynix »

cobbaut wrote: post #88
tofurocks wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do something similar with Gmail - if your email is matt@gmail.com you can receive to Matt+1@gmail.com, matt+2 etc. Although some websites reject this format.

While the + is part of the RFC, many websites do not accept a +sign in an email address field.

I've been "fighting" many websites in the last 20+ years, which use(d) javascript libaries which accept "only a-z, 0-9 and _" as valid characters in a local part. Some even changed their code after I complained and pointed them to the relevant parts of RFC822 (and all successors)

IMNSHO: sysadmins who do not know that the local part of an email address is not of their concern (as long as it complies to RFC 822++), are not worth their money. And web designers? Don't get me started on that topic ;-0

Edit: ok, they even allow "." and "-" in local parts.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#108

Post by hutzlibu »

skrebbel wrote: post #69
ksey3 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spam and trolling even happens on a physical newspapers/radio/tv/books/magazines. Its just that you have to pay to do it. The rich/ceremonial/leisure classes have through out history been constantly spamming everyone with whatever shit occurs to their 3 inch brains, because they can afford to buy the largest amount of attention. To bad there is not enough attention for anything anymore cause production of content is…

Spam filter idea: posts with bad interpunction are likely content-free angry ramblings!

Yeah, but in the long run (or very soon), you might have to use grammar misstakes as a captcha, to seperate bots from humans.

Re: The Frustration Loop

#110

Post by [deleted] »

tareqak wrote: post #79
petre wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't use Twitter for government comms I guess? It's a private system with its own rules. They can degrade the experience as much as they like if the system flags one as a troll, regardless of their being part of an organization.

Well, here is the thing: maybe a troll can use the idea that a comments on a government official's account is a public forum and demand that the third party remove the troll flag, or demand that the troll flag be ignored for government accounts. > U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan ruled on May 23 that comments on the president's account, and those of other government officials, were public forums…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN