https://lemmy.world/post/42564623

Lmao already people making their agents try this on the site. Of course what could have been a somewhat interesting experiment devolves into idiots getting their bots to shill ads/prompt injections for their shitty startups almost immediately.

More concerningly is this going to trial in the US’ current governmental “degraded” (to put it lightly) condition. NFPs get a bunch of concessions and benefits to being such. It’s not unheard of for NFPs to have for profits subsidiaries but I feel like letting them bootstrap into FP, often on the taxpayers/states dime should be, legally speaking, a no no.

Nah it’s just your claim of them of addressing none of the OPs concerns and being a blind shill is objectively wrong and you’e in your feelings about that being pointed out to you.

Fuck that is depressing. I had hoped I’d be able to pay for a service and not worry about this shit to avoid the hassle of self hosting. Very informative thank you.

Op.

can create a priority inbox without all the pesky notification clutter

User.

(e.g. you can create aliases for your shipping stuff called [website].shipping@[myalias].com and then make a rule including all the adresses .shipping to a specific folder).

I.e avoiding shipping notification clutter by directing to folders. Don’t really disagree with the placing too much trust in one company for whatever it’s worth.

Thanks for the links, the recovery email aspect was covered in the initial comment old mate was replying to. I was more interested in if the hand your ass over remark had anything to do with the “they cant read your emails”/encryption part. The second link is very interesting though:

After providing the activist’s metadata to Swiss authorities, ProtonMail removed the section that had promised no IP logs, replacing it with one saying, “ProtonMail is an email that respects privacy and puts people (not advertisers) first.”

Also, sealioning is “just asking questions” (JAQ’ing off). Consistently interrogating a position or POV for example, with requests for evidence. Not asking someone to provide some sort of evidence for a single claim they made in reply to another user and refusal to find said evidence for them.

Sealioning (also sea-lioning and sea lioning ) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity (“I’m just trying to have a debate”), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter

Emphasis mine. From wiki. I appreciate the attempt to deescalate though and accept it’s probably time to pack it in with that particular user.

How about you google burden of proof? Like the other user said burden of proof is on the party making the claim. It’s not on other people to prove the claim wrong by doing research for you.

Sure I saw yours and accept that, but “hand your ass over” doesn’t equate to “complies minimally with legal request they have to in order to remain functioning as a business” in my book.

Burden of proof is on you.

Are you basing this on anything? I agree with another poster that proton being the go to alternative is somewhat suspect in my paranoid brain but some of these remark here seem pretty outlandish.

They addressed all the OPs requirement excluding remarking on the spam filter. What are you even talking about.

One of these can just be solved with a mailbox rule within the email client itself for what it’s worth. Make a rule that’s based on keywords in the subject line and have them moved into a folder that you clear out every couple of months. Downside is the email client need to be running/opened for it to process them.

Weird thing to go to bat for but the emphasis is on material. Even if it’s generated or drawn if it depicts CSA acts it can constitute CSAM and is even treated as such in a lot of jurisdictions. Though generated more so than drawn due its appearance of being genuine. It feels like saying “this isn’t porn of Y celebrity because it’s fake”, but it’s still porn.

Did I say that? GitHub action descriptions isn’t really an avenue to communicate with users.

I think the description is sufficient. As long as the dev and contributors know what it’s referring to. Isn’t this app mostly worked on by one person? I think people complaining about short action descriptions or calling them stupid is a bit excessive. Unless both you and the OP are looking to contribute?

Not sure I agree with some of the assertion made there but regardless thanks for the reply. I look forward to checking it out.

Looks interesting, was AI used in any of this?