- Avast sent a reminder email promoting its Avast Premium Security software, stating that modern scams are smarter and target people through pressure, such as calls that sound like a bank, urgent delivery texts, and AI-generated deepfakes. - The email offers Avast Premium Security, which includes new AI-powered scam detection for phones and PCs, at a 60% discount, costing $31.08 for the first year, then renewing at $77.99/year. - The new plan is advertised to cover one PC and one mobile device for less than the cost of two separate subscriptions and comes with a 30-day money-back guarantee. - Automatic Deepfake Guard, a feature of the software, only works on Instagram, Dailymotion, Facebook, TikTok, Twitch, Vimeo, X, and YouTube for English videos and requires specific hardware and operating system requirements (Windows 11 or later with an 8-core Qualcomm or Intel AI PC or 6-core non-AI PC, both with 16GB of RAM).
Dear nmh-workers, Regarding the proposed JMAP file abstraction, it appears to function largely as a JMAP-based NFS. While the goal of maintaining shell semantics through modern back-end objects is clear, the portability and complexity issues associated with FUSE present significant challenges for nmh integration. The discussion regarding the mapping of MH to IMAP highlights the technical debt and extensive file-access assumptions currently within the codebase. While adding direct IMAP support is theoretically possible, the volume of work required remains a primary obstacle. Ultimately, as the industry moves toward these protocols, the core challenge remains finding a balance between preserving existing workflows and adapting to modern standards. Best regards, Zac On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 at 3:05 am, <[email protected]> wrote: > Send nmh-workers mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of nmh-workers digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. proposed JMAP file abstraction (George Michaelson) > 2. Re: proposed JMAP file abstraction (Ken Hornstein) > 3. Re: proposed JMAP file abstraction (George Michaelson) > 4. Re: proposed JMAP file abstraction (Ken Hornstein) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2026 06:18:31 +0700 > From: George Michaelson <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: proposed JMAP file abstraction > Message-ID: > < > cam2ggyk4+thwiaaw81_tyuob8nnesztf3o5usbbzka68nt_...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > What do people think? Could this work for a more natural (n)mh workflow > with mail? > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-jmap-filenode-04 > > -G > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/attachments/20260216/0cadc02e/attachment.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2026 22:33:50 -0500 > From: Ken Hornstein <[email protected]> > To: George Michaelson <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: proposed JMAP file abstraction > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > >What do people think? Could this work for a more natural (n)mh workflow > >with mail? > > > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-jmap-filenode-04 > > I read this, and it seems like it's describing "NFS using the JMAP > protocol". Which ... does not seem to change anything from the nmh > perspective? > > If I'm wrong about this protocol, please, explain it to me! > > --Ken > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2026 10:38:33 +0700 > From: George Michaelson <[email protected]> > To: Ken Hornstein <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: proposed JMAP file abstraction > Message-ID: > <CAM2GGym6KJ1S5VmXKpNZW0BM+oP4tqKqHB= > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > If it meant I could keep the front-end (shell) semantics but work with > slightly different back-end objects, I would at least be able to exploit > muscle memory. > > in all other regards I think you're right. Fuse FS type overlay would make > this entirely moot. > > I remember a few decades ago having similar feelings about "can we map MH > onto IMAP" and the retorts were "yes, but you do it first" along with "no, > and it's a stupid idea" and I think this "can we make MH work with more > modern <x>" is the hisenberg problem of our age: we love the s/w but the > rest of the world keeps on inventing things. STOP INVENTING THINGS! > > cheers > > -G > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 1:33 PM Ken Hornstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >What do people think? Could this work for a more natural (n)mh workflow > > >with mail? > > > > > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-jmap-filenode-04 > > > > I read this, and it seems like it's describing "NFS using the JMAP > > protocol". Which ... does not seem to change anything from the nmh > > perspective? > > > > If I'm wrong about this protocol, please, explain it to me! > > > > --Ken > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/attachments/20260216/f8e8f426/attachment.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2026 11:28:28 -0500 > From: Ken Hornstein <[email protected]> > To: George Michaelson <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: proposed JMAP file abstraction > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > >If it meant I could keep the front-end (shell) semantics but work with > >slightly different back-end objects, I would at least be able to exploit > >muscle memory. > > I understand that goal, and I think there are no technical obstacles > to just adding "straight" IMAP support to nmh; all of the pieces are > there in the protocol and I've mapped out in my head how it would all > work. It's just a significant pile of work; I cannot overstate how > many assumptions are baked into the underlying code in terms of file > access. I would do it, but my personal and professional life has been > challenging for a while now. Maybe after AI takes my job I'll have some > more free time? Or maybe I'll use AI to write the code. > > >in all other regards I think you're right. Fuse FS type overlay would make > >this entirely moot. > > I understand the desire for that, but to reiterate my concerns about that > approach: > > - FUSE is not portable. I know, you're going to say that FUSE runs on > different OSes, but when you dig down into it you find that a FUSE > filesystem cannot easily run across different OSes without a lot of > work as the different OSes have different filesystem interfaces. > > - It's complicated; much more complicated than doing a "straight" adding > of IMAP to nmh. > > - The underlying interface you'd present wouldn't necessarily be something > that nmh could use (see the existing alpha-level abandoned > implementations > of which there have been several), which would either require adding > more support to nmh or adding more complexity to the FUSE filesystem. > > That being said ... if someone wants to do this, they should! Don't let > me stop you! Maybe get AI to write it? > > >I remember a few decades ago having similar feelings about "can we map MH > >onto IMAP" and the retorts were "yes, but you do it first" along with "no, > >and it's a stupid idea" and I think this "can we make MH work with more > >modern <x>" is the hisenberg problem of our age: we love the s/w but the > >rest of the world keeps on inventing things. STOP INVENTING THINGS! > > I understand that desire, I do ... but I've come to realize the world is > going to move on whether I want it to or not, and my choices are to either > deal with it or opt out. And I still want to email other people who > aren't nmh users, so I'm just going to have deal. > > --Ken > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > nmh-workers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers > > > ------------------------------ > > End of nmh-workers Digest, Vol 239, Issue 2 > ******************************************* >
