Fwiw they’re just collecting a paycheck. Sure it’s scummy for them to not reject the businesses offering them the money but tbh I really don’t blame them - I’d probably take the cash too.

Depending on the channel size sponsored ad reads can deliver upwards of multiple thousand per video for the creator. If you see multiple channels with the same ads, it’s bc the company advertising got a big budget approved, that’s it.

Imo just skip the ad reads (or get sponsorblock) and forget they exist. Usually the creator doesn’t even give a fuck who’s paying them or why. They are victims of the system too, not maliciously peddling garbage. I do wish they didn’t have to peddle anything, but here we are.

Fastmail supports aliases as well. I’m not sure how they are from a privacy side overall tho

Fastmail also offers this.

Curious to know how many others do as well.

So what changed with Lemmy then? A few months back when I joined the ecosystem many instances including LW were unreachable for many hours a day. Joining up to a new instance didn’t make LW content appear (as they were offline).

The issues today feel largely the same as a user, though less frequent. Am I misunderstanding?

If the instance that hosts those communities goes down or struggles to stay afloat won’t it struggle to federate its content outside its own network?

If I join another instance and lemmy.world is down, it’s not like I can see the communities on lemmy.world.

Joining another instance as a user doesn’t solve the problem that lemmy.world has bad uptime outside of the scope of reducing the load on LW itself

My understanding of how xmpp has progressed is exactly what you think ActivityPub needs. Xmpp is still alive and still continuing to drive for further technological standards and classification.

Google essentially dropped xmpp b/c it was such a slow progressing standard that was focused entirely on the technological progress and that march towards standardization and specification.

objectively be more secure in terms of data privacy

Please elaborate how email would be objectively more secure if you could block Gmail.

You can already block Gmail today from any other provider by putting a filter on incoming @gmail addresses. How does that make email more secure?

This thread isn’t about kbin though. We don’t need to clutch pearls about other services on fediverse when discussing what happens with Lemmy instances.

I think battle.net did this for a long time. I am probably misremembering but gosh whatever service I experienced it with was annoying

Today I learned! Thanks for the info :)

Yep, it’s got both visits recorded. Idk why my ip on mobile networks was geolocated so far away.

Visited on my mobile this morning while commuting and no VPN and it geo located me 1000 miles away.

Visited again connected to a WiFi network and it got me right. Fun stuff

Yeah but your pattern is to re use labels (eg: beetus-friends@port87.com). If you suggest users reuse the labels they lose their effectiveness in working as aliases.

You are designing for a different feature set, I see this, however I think you may have some blind spots with what other email inbox providers offer and what users are looking for.

Good luck on the journey, your product already seems quite feature rich :)

I think you are misconstruing spam in this context.

While you are right about “spam” mail not meeting valid header details or authentication, a lot of “spammy” content does - marketing emails.

fastmails aliased emails allow for users to generate unique email addresses for each individual service they sign up for. What this enables is that when that service inevitably sells that email address to another spammy, potentially legitimate, but still spammy provider. They can then unsubscribe from that alias email entirely.

What you are describing seems less focused on protecting one address from being sold and shared. I think you need to accommodate for the fact that businesses sell lists of email addresses against their users wishes. That use case doesn’t seem to be met yet