Re: Where is the nginx.org mailinglist gone?
On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 11:03 AM <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 05:13:54PM +0300, monodev wrote:
> [...]
> > A court can check whether this is the case or not, but spam filters can't,
> > so delivery rate suffers for no benefit.
>
> Getting spam under control with SPF/DKIM is (and always has been) a
> fool's errand. The result is that a sizeable part of the spam I get
> these days has correct SPF/DKIM, washed through some throwaway account
> from a Big Provider.
>
> I'm enough of a cynic to think that, for some, this was the plan all
> along: "don't spam us, we spam you".
In the US, you can thank 47 USC § 230, a/k/a "Section 230",
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230>. It is called the "26
words that created the internet":
No provider or user of an interactive computer service
shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any
information provided by another information content
provider.
It allows the Big Tech bros to send their customer's spam with
impunity. Big Tech bros are almost never responsible or liable for
their subscriber's spam. This is a divergence from existing US law,
where Big Tech would be held accountable or liable in any other
setting.
The laws in DE may be different. I wish folks from other countries
would start litigating this crap. The only way to effect change from
a corporation is to cost them money. Big Tech won't change until it
affects their bottom line.
Jeff
Reply to: