On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Kim Alvefur <z...@zash.se> wrote: > On 2013-05-22 18:22, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > > PS: I am wondering whether the claimed chat spam problems mentioned in > the press articles are actually true? > > It matches what was said before, search this list for "spammy invites". > > I'm with PSA on this one - I think it's wild exaggeration, just as branding all the myriad of domains which federated on good terms as being "insignificant" was similarly rhetoric.
The single thing that annoys me most about this whole affair is the dubious passing off of business decisions as technical ones. Sadly, I don't think this is journalists misquoting - the video footage, for instance, seems consistent. In any case, I've argued before, and will argue again, that Google, by restricting messaging to only people on the roster, forced their spam issue on themselves - spammy messages would have been significantly easier to detect and prevent than spammy subscription requests. Dave.
