tendto

If the cost was 100x lower?

I just got suspended by Google for Unacceptable Business Practices trying to place an ad. I must have filled out some field wrong. So I searched for placing ads on DDG and found this url.

I used to use POPFile as a trainable Bayesian classifier to mark spam and ham. Worked well.

I used to use a system that decreased the amount of email I read by 100x.

I recently built another system that decreased it to zero.

The last two aren't organization friendly. The Bayesian classifier might be your best bet.

How would the service pay for itself? Are you willing to pay?

re: B, D) Could data mining be okay for public feeds where people choose to be anonymous?

Could private groups be peer-to-peer encrypted so the network can't decrypt and can't mine the conversation?

If I build it will you come?

Thank you for the thoughtful response. If your most gratuitously positive interpretation is that an anonymous and private messaging system will be used only anonymously with no other feature whatsoever, and that people who know each other won't identify themselves to each other as they do in real life should they choose to, and that the majority of the user base will be criminals, and that this business you know little of is a criminal enterprise, then this system isn't for you.

Do you really think criminals won't build private communication systems on their own anyway?

I'm less interested in the public eye and more interested in the private substance.

If I had the option, I'd rather do business with a machine instead of a person or business, if the protocol for doing business can be proven to not need trust. This appears possible only with machines.

It's possible for a messaging service to feature anonymity and privacy and prove the messaging protocol to be trustless.

Whether you want all messaging services to be public and run by known people or not is irrelevant. Anonymous, private messaging is possible, growing and possibly inevitable.

Choosing to have more power in your words with your good-name behind them is exactly this: a choice. Not an obligation.

If you're complicit to a crime, the method of communication being encrypted or not doesn't absolve you from the crime.

Making an anonymous company in Wyoming and New Mexico permits running the company from these two states but not from a different state, like the state you live in. It requires registering the anonymous company in the state you live in too. This second level of indirection is burdensome enough, for me, to not want to do it.

Free startup idea: register anonymous companies from Wyoming into other states. Like a vpn for company registration.

Spam can be stopped in a simple way without "laws protecting us".

Fascinating. Can you share more about this? Do you mean something like government or other entities can take away a company once it becomes intolerable?

Is there any way to protect from this?

The mere fact that BlueSky is on wired is a sign it's doing something right.

I appreciate sharing this perspective and I see how typically anonymous companies "did" bad things. You're not the arbitrator of who people want to work with or of the definition of what "as a society" people choose to do.

I want privacy. Privacy isn't a crime. It's possibly a foundation to freedom of speech.

Also thinking of building a private/anonymous messaging service. By this I also mean I want to not know anything about the customer.

I want privacy for me and for the customer.