Re: [Operators] spam resistance

2013-05-24 Thread Philipp Hancke
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Dave Cridland wrote: [...] I think email was different for three reasons: 1) Email came about mostly before the Internet took off - indeed, there's an argument that the Internet expansion was driven by email, not the other way around. This placed restrictions on how email

Re: [Operators] spam resistance

2013-05-24 Thread Olle E. Johansson
24 maj 2013 kl. 11:00 skrev Dave Cridland : > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Peter Saint-Andre > wrote: > On 5/23/13 4:50 PM, Justin Uberti wrote: > > I just realized my statement could be parsed 2 different ways. To > > be clear: it is sad that spammers were more willing to adopt > > XMPP*t

Re: [Operators] spam resistance

2013-05-24 Thread Dave Cridland
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 5/23/13 4:50 PM, Justin Uberti wrote: > > I just realized my statement could be parsed 2 different ways. To > > be clear: it is sad that spammers were more willing to adopt > > XMPP*than other IM networks were willing to*. Believe me,

Re: [Operators] spam resistance

2013-05-23 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/23/13 4:50 PM, Justin Uberti wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Dave Cridland > wrote: > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Justin Uberti > mailto:jube...@google.com>> wrote: > > That seems like an overly cy

Re: [Operators] spam resistance (was: Re: google abandoning XMPP??)

2013-05-23 Thread Matthew Wild
On 23 May 2013 23:50, Justin Uberti wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Justin Uberti >> wrote: >>> >>> That seems like an overly cynical assessment of the situation. Speaking >>> as an individual, it is sad that spammers were

Re: [Operators] spam resistance (was: Re: google abandoning XMPP??)

2013-05-23 Thread Luke-Jr
On Thursday, May 23, 2013 10:50:19 PM Justin Uberti wrote: > I just realized my statement could be parsed 2 different ways. To be clear: > it is sad that spammers were more willing to adopt XMPP* than other IM > networks were willing to*. Believe me, we tried. Other IM networks continue to use XMP

Re: [Operators] spam resistance (was: Re: google abandoning XMPP??)

2013-05-23 Thread Justin Uberti
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Justin Uberti wrote: > >> That seems like an overly cynical assessment of the situation. Speaking >> as an individual, it is sad that spammers were more willing to adopt XMPP >> than other IM networks, but

Re: [Operators] spam resistance

2013-05-23 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/23/13 3:20 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > Google's was exasperated Exacerbated? But our Google friends were probably exasperated, too. > not by simply allowing federation, but by allowing largely > unauthenticated federation, making it by far the w

Re: [Operators] spam resistance (was: Re: google abandoning XMPP??)

2013-05-23 Thread Dave Cridland
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Justin Uberti wrote: > That seems like an overly cynical assessment of the situation. Speaking as > an individual, it is sad that spammers were more willing to adopt XMPP than > other IM networks, but so it goes. > I'm not sure sufficient information exists in o

Re: [Operators] spam resistance (was: Re: google abandoning XMPP??)

2013-05-23 Thread Matthew Wild
On 23 May 2013 00:35, Justin Uberti wrote: > That seems like an overly cynical assessment of the situation. Speaking as > an individual, it is sad that spammers were more willing to adopt XMPP than > other IM networks, but so it goes. To pick on that last point - it's just not true. Other network

Re: [Operators] spam resistance

2013-05-22 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Justin, thanks for weighing in. On 5/22/13 5:35 PM, Justin Uberti wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Peter Saint-Andre > mailto:stpe...@stpeter.im>> wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > > On 5/22/13 2:40 PM, Jes

Re: [Operators] spam resistance (was: Re: google abandoning XMPP??)

2013-05-22 Thread Justin Uberti
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 5/22/13 2:40 PM, Jesse Thompson wrote: > > On 5/22/2013 10:02 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: On 5/22/13 8:52 AM, > > Jesse Thompson wrote: > Google failed to note the correlation o

[Operators] spam resistance (was: Re: google abandoning XMPP??)

2013-05-22 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/22/13 2:40 PM, Jesse Thompson wrote: > On 5/22/2013 10:02 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: On 5/22/13 8:52 AM, > Jesse Thompson wrote: Google failed to note the correlation of the drop in federated XMPP connections with the fact that Google