I hope community will help in this situation! ;)

  • TedvdBA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t think removing protonmail is the correct solution.

    This is a list of email providers that facilitate temporary email addresses. So adding outlook and Apple to that list makea more sense to me?

    • privacyfighter@discuss.onlineOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      But inclusion of Proton domains makes many Proton users to be unable to register on websites. It is only helping google to keep monopoly and it is simply privacy harming

      • TedvdBA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        How do you know this?

        Besides that, this is just a list providing burner email addresses. Adding Outlook to this list makes sense. If sites are using this list as a blocklist that would cause issues, forcing them to not use this as blocklist anymore.

        • InfiniWheel@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          If I read correctly, in a PR someone makes an argument that Proton and Tuta are newer services that advertise privacy and anonymity as opposed to more well established services like Outlook or Apple mail that do end up linking mail to an identity.

      • Spotlight7573@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The list that the repo maintains is for services that can provide burner or anonymous emails.

        You can sign up for Proton Mail anonymously, as demonstrated by a frequent contributor to that repo in issue #414.

        Therefore, it seems appropriate for it to be on that list, as annoying as that is.

        I’d hope that site providers wouldn’t just summarily ban any domains on that list but I understand why they may take that shortcut to reduce spam/abuse if they don’t have adequate resources to handle it other ways.

        • Grangle1@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I have a bad feeling that’s what a lot of site providers will do, and you can almost guarantee the big tech data brokers will push them to do so, especially Google/Gmail. They will own our lives, by force if necessary.

          • TedvdBA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yes, that’s why I proposed to add Outlook to the list too?

            Mozilla provides a similar service I believe?

            • privacyfighter@discuss.onlineOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Yes. Aliases is not disposable mails. Moreover SimpleLogin (Proton aliasing service) forbids to use it as disposable in ToS

  • Teknikal@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    Leave Proton alone ffs, without them I would have my Internet seriously limited by default by UK isps and the moronic Government that just wants everything to be it’s own propaganda.

  • Toes♀@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    Blocking disposable emails is like fighting a hydra, they will always outplay a black list. This just hurts the legitimate users not on a popular provider.

  • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t get the point of all these disposable email filters. It’s not hard to buy a new domain and set up a wildcard email server.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    If the repo owner declined the request, that’s pretty much the end of it. They own it, they can do what they want.

  • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Why does anyone care? This library has no public dependants, and low double-digit weekly downloads. Nobody’s using that crappy library in the first place because the idea as a whole is incredibly dumb and futile.

    This is for 0.1x engineers that can’t figure out a captcha on their side.

    • privacyfighter@discuss.onlineOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Unfortunately, I contacted support of some local websites, and they said that they wouldn’t white list any domains and I need to contact this list owner

  • catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the second time this month some overzealous moron decided to add these because they can be used for burner accounts, as if other services cannot. People like this are why we as a species haven’t advanced more.