Convenience isnt consequence free. For now you get to choose your own adventure. Security cannot exist without some degree of privacy. Why is the service free or below cost? You can expect those expenses to appear in many forms for you down the road. Like could your health care, life or car insurance rates adjust after you joined group A or you mentioned topic B? Ask who might value your information more than you?
-Sent from an insecure iphone out of convenience and limited options available for mobile. Nobody is perfect or pure, but we should be supportive of long term results & perspectives to strive for. Aug 12, 2024 at 10:57 by [email protected]: > Yes, but this is also where the concept of free market competition comes into > play. Any company offering a service in a given space will compete to provide > the best service in that space. > > As a consumer, you compare and contrast the different services based on a > number of metrics (Price, quality, uptime, long term suppport). You also take > into consideration that just because a service advertises a given feature, > doesn't mean it actually works as advertised. > > I keep harping on the trust concept, but only because I think it is a major > factor in choosing a platform. If a Vendor provides a service with certain > expectations, the Consumer will expect them to meet those expectations. If > the Vendor fails to meet those expectations, the Consumer writes a bad review > and looks for a new Vendor providing the same service. LTS (how long a > feature will be available), and Open Standards (portability of data > generated/stored on the service) are 2 features everyone should be taking > into consideration. > > Services that implement Open Standards are nice because if you run into > problems with that service, your data may be compatible with other systems. > e.g. The GPG keys created for my Proton Mail account can be exported from the > web interface, and imported using KGPG. This means that I can encrypt/decrypt > data in KDE using the same keys as my email. AND, if for some reason I decide > I don't like Proton any more, I can cancel my subscription and continue using > my keys through a different email service. Open Standards :) > -Ben > > > On Monday, August 12th, 2024 at 8:32 AM, mo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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 >>
