151–160 of 282 posts
Just get the dotcom. [0,1] [0] http://www.paulgraham.com/name.html [1] https://zlipa.com
> Bootstrapped with > Our goal is to help makers find an awesome home for their project and not to help you flip. We reserve the right to refuse, or cancel membership to anyone without explanation.
Nice, so only you're allowed to flip your parked domains.
These are also good reasons to avoid using .so domains. You can also expect mail delivery issues and blanket corporate firewall blocks on .so. The rising prominence of https://notion.so is changing the cultural situation somewhat, but very slowly. (Edit: I work at Notion)
This means you're subject to the politics of whatever country's TLD you're using. If the country's lawmakers suddenly decide that their TLD should only be for use by local entities, or that owners of popular domains should pay more, or that certain types of content is banned, you have no recourse.
(Not that ICANN policies always help you. Some of the new TLDs have contracts with ICANN that allow them to arbitrarily jack up prices, which they've done: https://domainnamewire.com/2017/03/07/yikes-death-spiral-new...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish the Telco's did MORE filtering given the huge amount of SMS spam I get since Twilio has turned this channel into a positive ROI for spammers. (1st biggest spam channel being email, which surprise/surprise - Twilio also dominates via SendGrid)
I have no knowledge of the ROI involved here, but would love to understand this: Twilio is 0.75c to send a text. Is it possible for a spammer to generate >$75 per 10,000 people spammed? I've no idea were the SMS spams I've got link to (not about to find out) but they are so obviously spam. We use SMS for communicating with users and would be happy to more a lot more per text to escape the 'positive ROI for spammers'…
They just need one person in each 10k spammed on average, to click the phishing url asking them to pay a fake bill and then charge them $328 instead of the $3.28 displayed o the page.
I received (and reported to their scam Dept) a phishing SMS yesterday pretending to be from Australia Post asking for $3.28 to release a delivery package I'm waiting for, which is most people in Australia nowadays with the current slowdown in mail delivery speed.
I am only guessing that the $3.28 phishing purchase would have attempted a $328 charge on my card... but that would be wildly profitable if the input costs per successful fraud were under $100...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So put it in a spam folder. If I had a spam texts folder that showed me everything I was being blocked from, I'd both appreciate it and not feel this massive breach of trust that things being sent to me are being completely ignored by a third party system. The system that does this is absolutely primed for censorship, and we have no way to know it's not being used.
> So put it in a spam folder. 1) Neither the SMS protocol nor any phone I've ever seen has any mechanism to file messages in "folders". 2) Processing SMS messages and delivering them to subscribers has a cost. Doing so for high-volume junk messages would place a significant burden on carriers. 3) Most carriers used to charge subscribers for receiving SMS messages. Some still do! Charging subscribers to receive spam S…
Or let me view it through some other means.
I'm not opposed to spam filtration as a user default, but doing so silently without any indication of what is being filtered or ability to verify it is working is not acceptable for such a vital messaging system.
What about .app domains?
The .app TLD is owned by Google, requires HTTPS, and I haven't run into any issues in practice. Whereas my corporate VPN blocks all .xyz domains.
I've always felt conflicted about this. I generally support moving everything to HTTPS, and requiring it for new TLDs isn't a terrible idea because there's no chance of breaking anything legacy.[1]
On the other hand, Google owns the TLD, controls the HSTS preload list, controls the most popular browser. The idea that an entire TLD could be added to the HSTS preload list was a completely unilateral decision by Google. It makes me uneasy.
[1] ...unless you were using the domain internally assuming it would never be added to the root zone, which bit some people when they did this with .dev
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Email providers absolutely block email, its the edge cases that make your spam folder.
> its the edge cases that make your spam folder. Well, from their perspective. Not from any reasonable perspective; I have a few obviously-spam emails in my gmail spam folder right now, but I've had plenty of problems with gmail refusing to deliver completely legitimate email to me.
I suspect any more than you see
My domain is almost marked as spam solely on TLD grounds. What's the point of a TLD if it isn't a first-party domain on the internet?
SpamAssassin Score: -0.599
Message is NOT marked as spam
Points breakdown:
-5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
high trust
[***.***.***.*** listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: ***.xyz]
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2)
[***.***.***.*** listed in wl.mailspike.net]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
2.0 PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD Untrustworthy TLDs
[URI: ***.xyz (xyz)]
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily
valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
2.0 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD_FP From abused NTLD
0.5 FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD From abused NTLD
0.0 TVD_SPACE_RATIO No description available.I was pretty excited when ICANN opened up a bunch of new domain extensions, but it does sometimes feel like "all these extensions are great if you don't plan on using them". It was pretty cool that I managed to buy a bunch of domains like . , but to be honest I really don't see myself using my .blackfriday domain for anything. For that matter, I think that (somewhat ironically) `my-last-name.email` would not be taken…
their customers are on discord, twitter, telegram and wechat so email delivery is not a factor
the entire sites and revenue drivers are entirely client side (with the "servers" being the smart contract methods stored on the nearest blockchain nodes, this has only one initial upload cost but functions similarly to lambda functions except the users pay for the computations), when the domain is down or blocked, the user can interact directly with the nearest node hosting the website's associated smart contracts, if they are interested enough
this is working really well for a lot of organizations, and it has been this way for several years now
makes lean SaaS services even leaner, and allows them to grow even faster - as long as their customer base is already a crypto native. I haven't seen any organization succeed if they have to sell their customer on some crypto browser extension.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disable auto-image loading, and it will cut down the ability for companies to do this. Unfortunately, this often times leads to direct phone calls along the lines of, "Hey taftster, did you get my email? It shows that you haven't opened it yet." This side-effect is also very annoying.
Who gives companies their personal phone number?