I live in the Netherlands and have a Russian/Ukrainian cleaner. She only listens to Russian news and basically fully supports Putin's' actions. Really just brainwashed. Now there are other recent topics where she was not very well informed (Covid related) so her filters and logic are a bit off... but still.

I could only point her to the BBC...

There is a big distinction between an anonymous inbox and a throwaway inbox. We used to block Mailinator etc, but if it was just an anonymous forwarder, we would not.

I'm pretty sure they will make an exception for Google.

That is right. I've blocked them too (used to work at a place that sent emails out). And the reason is the following: The person that enters such an email address does not want a long term stream of emails. Or anything. It basically makes the whole point of email "moot" (having an inbox).

Now, do I believe that businesses ask for email addresses illegally? Yes. You should not require to enter an address for e.g. a download. So we accepted Mailinator-type addresses but did not deliver (as it was too hard for us to detect new addresses). The usage of mailinator type addresses was a red flag on our customers as there was probably something wrong with the opt-in of that customer.

Second: Mailinator and other services are sometimes used as spamtraps. Now don't get me wrong, they have their uses. It was also in my interest to filter out the bad guys (so you needed some signals now and then even if you cannot trace it back). But not all of those services bounce inactive accounts. We have seen some weird ip blocks (where we could prove we, and our customer, did nothing wrong). Anti spam people are sometimes hugely incorrect in their assumptions / methods. The people surrounding such services were the weirdest I encountered.

Third: We would send out personal information. E.g. your name or other transaction related information. That information would end up "on someone else's harddisk". The PII and other elevated rights (e.g. "change email address to spam someone else") do not belong to an unknown third party.

But back to mozmail: We would not block. There are other services that are actually linked to a human recipient and has a gazillion forwarder addresses. We did not block those as the recipients would only be anonymous (which was fine from our perspective, you have that right and it is smart to know where you entered an email address).

On Unix they also have a gazillion command-line tools which do small things. That is good.

Let a class do one thing only and unit-test the hell out of it.

I have yet to meet sysadmins that actually upped their skill set. It seems their mindset is stuck in the 1980's. They keep crying that one week is too fast to update all their servers after specific CVE's. Yet we can update all our software including the containers, and release it, in a day.

I am not specifically a fan of "all those containers", but it beats the usual sysadmin.

Yes, of course there is.

Phishing is criminal that is trying to cause 100% mayhem on your computer, accounts, reputation, your employer and whatever they can get their hands on. This is "block forever" stuff.

Commercial spam is more benign, it only wants your money. Often in limited ways. Maybe they improve themselves, now and then. You may not want to block a commercial sender "forever" (there really are commercial senders that have technical difficulties, ending up on blacklists).

Very big difference.

We appreciate it more if you stay fully on topic

If redhat is not a symbol for the redneck Texan...

That and the fact that our society and its members are actually diverting their energy to useless things... It is a big waste of time.

I have trouble using my monthly 5GB bundle... It seems my phone is using less battery by only using mobile data.

> Remote access - a lot of home users are behind NAT, and often don't have control over the gateway
VPN. Should be easier to setup though.

>Offsite storage - if someone has broken into your premises they could steal or destroy the onsite copy of the data
If they know where it is. Smart burglars hide their faces anyway.

Orwellian mechanics are Orwellian. I wouldn't want to live in an Orwellian society even if it would remove all crime from the world.

Yes there is racism in this world. But banning words is not going to solve that. At all. It literally has no effect on actual racism. People feel bad about those words because they are discriminated, not the other way around.

Racism is about opinions of other people. About people being afraid. About how people deal with power or lack of it. About why people show inappropriate behavior and deal with it. It is about culture. And in the country where people give the least f*** about others, especially the poor, that is where the problem is the biggest.

Until the dual-party system is changed in the US, racism will stay as strong as it is. Because it is a result of fear, uncertainty, doubt and a lack of appreciation of different minded / cultured / looking people. Unfortunately, the country that markets itself as the strongest country, is very weak in this aspect.

Now the disclaimer: There are worse places on the world and Europe is rather lacking in providing actual shelter for people running from war. Being discriminated is not fun (I witnessed it once), having to fight for your live is worse.

You missed the 1984 reference to Newspeak. Very Orwellian.