201–210 of 304 posts
The reason disposable email addresses exist and are popular is because services have abused users' trust to not use these emails for shady ad revenue and marketing schemes. It's further compounded by shoddy security that leads to leaks and exposure of people's personal email addresses to pwned compromised lists. People don't want to give up their personal email addresses so that they can be spammed or hacked. Until s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m the founder of a small bootstrapped SAAS and people use disposable email addresses all the time to avoid paying for our product. We don’t sell any data.
> people use disposable email addresses all the time to avoid paying for our product. From the prospective subscriber’s perspective, that’s your problem to worry about — not theirs. > We don’t sell any data. How should users know that? It’s also not just a matter of selling data — almost all companies will spam your email address, even if you check the box asking them not to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you're accepting that for every company you sign up for you should expect at least one spam that requires time & attention to deal with (some may require login, etc)? Fair enough but I disagree that this is something we should all be accepting just for the benefit of a minority that happens to work in marketing. > of those kinds of emails [emphasis mine] Also keep in mind that scummy companies have caught on to th…
What I "accept" is that getting an email I'd rather not have gotten is not a day-ruining event worth rudely snarking at strangers on the internet for, and the level of entitled rage and piling on generated in response to a calmly stated ask (let's save 'spam' for things that actually meet an objective, commonly-accepted standard used by most groups that actually try to stop it) is ridiculous.
But, sure, say we go with your wishes and, as someone else suggested, call your spam something else than "spam" -- let's go with their suggestion and call it "trash email". Then the category -- or, now, categories -- of stuff that we want to get rid of from our inboxes become, in stead of just "spam", the more cumbersome "spam and trash email".
I'm sure you see the problem that immediately rears its ugly head: Language is lazy. "Spam and trash email" will in daily speech, inevitably, shortly become... "Spam". You may try to resist that, and as a longtime linguistic prescriptivist I extend you my sympathies... (But, psst, spoiler alert: This quixotic struggle is doomed to fail.)
But, anyway, you are of course perfectly free to keep campaigning for your cause. Only, in the name of all that is decent, be honest about it and call it for what it is: You're not defending spam, "only" trash.
Maybe after a while you'll realise why the rest of the world sees no difference in your distinction.
This was inevitable. If you’re leaking the info that you’re using a proxy, it’ll eventually be used by people who want to. One solution is a traditional webmail provider being willing to reuse that primary user domain for forwarding addresses. There are two that I know of doing this, Fastmail with @fastmail.com and Apple with @icloud.com. These domains probably won’t ever be blacklisted, because you’d also blacklist…
I've got my own domain, for example: mydomain.com. So my fastmail email address is depingus@mydomain.com. But with subdomain addressing, I can sign up for services with unique email addresses that look like:
social.hackernews@depingus.mydomain.com
Fastmail will automatically route incoming messages arriving to this email address to my "social" folder. If I start getting junk to that address I can easily blacklist it.
It wasn't easy switching out my email address EVERYWHERE. And there are places that won't even let me change it. But in the end, it was so worth it. I don't even miss Google Inbox anymore!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup. Sign up for a trial of something and suddenly you're getting 3 emails a day. --- "Ravenstine, kick your goals into overdrive now" "Check this feature out!" "We're the best, but don't take our word for it" "Your account is waiting for you" "This will be like money in your pocket" "Don't miss out on our webinar" "The gift that keeps on giving" "It's been a while..." "So this is goodbye, Ravenstine?" --- F--- YOU!…
Ah, automatic drip emails. I don't know anybody who likes these things but a lot of marketing people insist that they are a necessity.
https://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/05/31/can-i-get-your-email/
+ anybody else miss reading about the Rust Evangelism Task Force?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't really get this. Where do you draw the line between disposable and non-disposable email? What prevents anyone from creating @gmail.com addresses?
You need a valid phone number to create a gmail account, and you can only have a few accounts attached to the same number. Google is "trusted" because they actively try to prevent spammers from joining their platform. Disposable email platforms don't, they let you create as many as you like.
Seems to me that 1) Gmail accounts aren't that hard to farm 2) most spam comes from free webmail providers not disposable email and 3) a captcha will solve most of your problems and if it doesn't, it means your site is being specifically targeted by someone with cash to burn, so you can assume that they'll have emails that aren't on the blacklist. At that point, invest in detection and moderation.
> @disposable-email-domains disposable-email-domains locked as too heated and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 16, 2022
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> let's save 'spam' for things that actually meet an objective, commonly-accepted standard used by most groups that actually try to stop it Your definition is based on what’s legal under the “established business relationship” exemption in the CAN-SPAM act, not any “commonly-accepted objective standard” of what spam is.
Spam fighting existed long before a 2003 US law. RBLs came into being in 1997, Spamhaus in 1998. You'll note precisely none of these organizations (in any country) blacklisting Amazon, or any other company, because they send marketing emails to their existing customers.
So then it wasn't originally defined as per your preferred legal wording, now was it?
> RBLs came into being in 1997, Spamhaus in 1998.
And did they coin the expression, or was the concept itself around long before that...? (A: AFAIK, at least a decade earlier.)
> You'll note precisely none of these organizations (in any country) blacklisting Amazon, or any other company, because they send marketing emails to their existing customers.
Ah. So it's not actually the legal definition that is important, but the corporate one. OK, gotcha, that is of course so much better. (Blindingly obvious: /s)
[Edit: Added missing quote marker > ]
Any useful disposable email service will only allow *receiving* emails. As a user this protects me against possible bad actors that for some reason need me to give out my email to them.
Any service allowing *sending out* mail from their mailservers will quickly find their mailservers blocked - this is also list based. A common one being spamhaus.org . The way firefox relay solves this is by only allowing to *reply* to mails you have received, and I assume they have some rate-limiting in place as well.
This is really just about making life harder, and forcing people into using an emailaddress as their identity token, which seems all sort of wrong.
Next someone will block mailservices that allow + adressing or other kinds of alias systems ?