I'm sorry, but that is not how email address are spammed in bulk.
The data-source are the enormous data breach that are more and more frequent.
There is more intensive to collect more information on someone you already know something about than spamming an email you don't even know if it's a valid one.
The spam can also be very more effective as it present itself with personal information about the spammed.
I'm not denying that it happens.
I'm saying that it not the classical way to spam people nowadays.
It's obvious to any non native english speaker, when you have a spam in english, it is because they toke the email from the web. When it's in you native language, it's usually from a data breach.
I'm vastly more spammed by the later. I can confirm it with unique email addresses of the "+" form (but not with the + character).
Also when I'm spammed in english, it's for Web3 crypto stuff and from a data breach it's a phishing attempt.
I’ve run a small thingy last year, on its own domain, with a (project-specific) email in plaintext on the homepage. I’ve got a fair bit of spam to that address.
But yeah, I’d say most junk mail is coming to (1) an address leaked from one Russian bank (!) I used, (2) the address listed in public business databases (I have a company in Estonia).
If you're only passing the address in private to some service, you can just use [some-string-unique-to-that-service]@yourdomain.com. Or, more classically, plus addressing to do the same. Then you just block that recipient.
That solution doesn't apply to the use case in the article.
Surely spammers just turn `me+leaked/sold@mail.com` into `me@mail.com` as well as `me+apple@mail.com`, `me+softbank@mail.com` etc. The cost of stripping any `+postfix` must be about zero even at volume.
Some people block all mail to non-plus-addressed emails on that inbox, so a plus address is required to be received at all. You could say then spammers will just add a random one, but they wouldn't be getting bounces and would have to guess as much. Still, even stripping the +'ed part is beyond what most of them even bother to do. That dropoff plus normal spam filters works well enough.
> Yes. OpenYak is local-first. Your conversations and files are stored only on your machine. When using cloud models, only API calls to LLM providers leave your computer.
So local-first and still upload files to cloud models if you configure it.
Catala is not at all about "proving the law" formally (I'm not even sure what it would mean?). It's about having a formal language to translate law into that both matches the way law is usually written ("default logic") and allows to make numerical computations on. This can typically be used to implement tax or benefits law so that it is way easier to check that the algorithm computing taxes/benefits is correct compared to the actual state of the art of using general purpose programming languages.
definition qualified_employee_discount
under condition is_property consequence
equals
if employee_discount >=
customer_price \* gross_profit_percentage
then customer_price \* gross_profit_percentage
else employee_discount
Dang, I wish all law was written like this instead of the purposefully obfuscated legalise of (lobbied) legislative lawyers meant to mislead people and slip in loopholes for their interest groups to profit of.
Clear legislature is definitely something every person in the world would benefit of - if the the country's administration would want that.
For me, a great advantage is that this system makes it far simpler to understand the impact of a change, say a multi-pronged bill incl millionaire taxes, energy subsidy changes etc.
I don’t know if they do it, but it allows proving properties of the law. For example, that the tax increases with income or that an exception doesn’t accidentally increase the tax paid.
I mean it makes sense that the sand is made of the same stuff as your local rocks, that's where it came from. Sure it washes around a bit in the surf but it's not like it's floating around the world on the ocean currents, at least not in massive quantities. I'm sure there are bits stuck in driftwood or whatnot but the vast majority should sink to the bottom.
And ê, when pronounced (most of the cases) it's just a è.
ë, contrary as said in the article (full slop?) is the most complicated and with some exceptions. But there is so few words that use that letter that you just don't have to care.
Just pronounce ë as è when its in (inside) a word and not pronounced at all when it's at the end.
The only exception I can think of is canoë (pronounced conoé), but everybody will understand if you say cano.
Ambiguë (ambiguous) and aiguë (acute) [1], but these are "old" spellings.
For instance, this word "ambiguë" was changed in the 1990 spelling reform to "ambigüe" [2] probably to emphasis the fact that the U is not mute (because for most -gue words it is, like for "fatigue" in french and english).
Like with ï and ü, the tréma mark is precisely the mark of an exception.
They did ask AI if AGI what a great name.
It said that it was the greatest name possible. It's bold, aspirational, and ... polarizing?!
Oh god! Mistral tell me it's highly polarizing, will make the buzz and it's risky but anyway people will know that ARM is doing CPU again now (maybe I did put too many context).
About IP. It's 70 years after the death of the author in France, so Camus (car crash in 1960) books will be PD in 2030.
There is an exception for people who lost live from war (+30 years), so 2044 is the year the elevate to PD for "Le petit prince".
I don't understand that right is attached to local legislation. Like you will have access to these book before we do because of the local legislation of USA? That is a bit crazy.
pnpm is amazing for speed and everybody should use it! but even with npm before it, at least it was correct. I had very few (none?) mysterious issues with it that could only be solved by nuking the entire environment. That is more than I can say about the python package managers before uv.
reply