Those def not the kind of mushrooms I prefer 😂.

Wouldn't all externally hosted services suffer a likewise vulnerability?
Granted are worse than others, albeit idk who is worse. I barely tried any
of them. I miss self hosting; I actually enjoyed sysadmin life aka
troubleshooting.

On Mon, Aug 12, 2024, 08:22 Ted Mittelstaedt <[email protected]> wrote:

> To be fair the 2003 version of Word didn't have all the Nanny State
> spyware-report-to-Microsoft stuff in it the current versions do.
>
> "The fact that GW provides the requested features today is moot, because
> tomorrow those features could be removed or changed rendering your
> conclusion incorrect."
>
> Yes this is correct - we have an Expense Report spreadsheet at work that
> uses a complicated macro that someone in the IT department created so that
> users can just type in the source and destination city in their travel and
> have the mileage calculated.  It uses a http call to Google to obtain the
> mileage.
>
> Well 8 months ago - Google made a change to the URL - a very slight one -
> whereupon the expense report spreadsheet broke, causing much hair-pulling
> and consternation.
>
> It took me around 6 hours to figure out what that change was and explain
> it to the IT department tech who wrote the macro so he could fix the
> sheet.  Needless to say there was no documentation on the Google website
> explaining why they made the change, and even more annoying the "old style"
> URL still worked perfectly - when typed into a web browser - thus greatly
> complicating troubleshooting by misdirecting me down innumerable
> rabbit-holes.
>
> That sheet also breaks when the credit card number on file with Google
> declines - which happens every 6 months or so when the purchasing
> department changes the card due to someone having stolen the number and not
> telling us they changed it.  Yet Google never charges the card because our
> usage of the API is below the minimum threshold.
>
> The whole system Google has setup for it's public APIs is completely
> ass-backwards.  And they get away with it because for 90% of the lower
> volume customers that use it, the APIs are free.  And you can bet Google
> tells their high-volume spammer..I mean users... that they are making
> changes before they do.  But the rest of their "customers" are out with the
> garbage - they are mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed BS.
>
> Ted
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PLUG <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ben Koenig
> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2024 9:17 AM
> To: Portland Linux/Unix Group <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PLUG] email hosting - who?
>
> Obligatory XKCD 743:
> https://xkcd.com/743
>
> A lot of people use "privacy" as a shorthand way to reference the larger
> issue of trust when it comes to companies like Google.
>
> Yes, GW does provide a lot of features that may fall perfectly in line
> with what users want. But there is more to infrastructure than just "does
> it have feature X?"
>
> Google in general has shown that it is not reliable from an infrastructure
> standpoint. They have a tendency to kill projects, and those projects that
> are not killed will someday change and end users often have no say in the
> matter. The fact that GW provides the requested features today is moot,
> because tomorrow those features could be removed or changed rendering your
> conclusion incorrect.
>
> Rational people generally avoid Google because they trusted them in the
> past, got burned and learned from the experience. IIRC there was a
> discussion very similar to this on G+.... let me get you a link... ;)
>
> -Ben
>
>
> On Thursday, August 8th, 2024 at 8:49 AM, mo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Not really.
> >
> > Privacy? Considering the insane amount everyone puts on social media,
> > what privacy is there? Plus anything other self hosted = someone has
> your data.
> >
> > Market diversity? Idk what that one means precisely.
> >
> > GW not Gmail. So not free.
> >
> > 144% for 1000% more services than mere email host.
> >
> > So nope, don't understand even slightly why rational ppl would not
> > choose GW in this scenario. But I appreciate the effort regardless.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2024, 07:29 Tomas Kuchta [email protected]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Privacy, market diversity, not having all eggs in one basket, gmail
> > > is free anyway, .... and 12*6=72 that happens to be 144% of 50
> > >
> > > I hope that gives you some idea what others may or may not think
> > > about when chosing a service provider.
> > >
> > > Tomas
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2024, 11:36 mo [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > > > If $50/yr, why not just use Google Workspace? $6/mo for all their
> > > > services.
> > > > I'm asking bc I want the cons of using GW.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2024, 01:18 Tomas Kuchta
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > ++ for fastmail email hosting.
> > > > >
> > > > > Works great with(out) own domain for $50 per year.
> > > > >
> > > > > The only feature I am missing - their calendar foes not export
> > > > > birthday calendar over IMAP.
> > > > >
> > > > > -T
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2024, 16:13 Courtney Rosenthal [email protected]
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, been there, done that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When I quit email self-hosting I went to fastmail.com. It
> > > > > > works out to
> > > > > > $50 per mailbox per year. I have a bunch of domains there. I
> > > > > > setup aliases in those domains that forward into one of two
> > > > > > mailboxes. So it's costing me about $100/yr for that and I'm
> > > > > > super satisfied.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They won't do DNS though. I'm using cloudns.net and I'm very
> > > > > > satisfied with them. I've had to use their support a few times
> > > > > > (for their monitoring service) and they've been super
> > > > > > responsive -- including implementing a feature request I made.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/6/24 14:34, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm winding down my self-hosted web space. Part of this is
> > > > > > > finding a place to host jamhome.us - or more accurately the
> > > > > > > email portion.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can you recommend a place that would do that? They can host
> > > > > > > the domain name too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Courtney Rosenthal / [email protected] / www.crosenthal.com
>
>

Reply via email to