• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    17 months ago

    I wish I could find one that is just a little less ideological. Not that I have a problem with ideologies, but I have trust issues, and I’ve seen some people justify some shit in the name of their ideologies, and as such I don’t fully trust someone with a policy like:

    To be hosted on our servers you have to share our principles of anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-homophobia, anti-transphobia, and anti-militarism. Your projects must as well be based on the same non-commercial nature which keep our project alive, and on the desire to share and experience relationships and struggles, with all the patience it requires.

    for instance not to monitor my email to ensure I adhere even when they pinky swear they don’t. Again, not that any of that would apply to me nor that they do spy but just the thought that they may us enough. Before someone says some smartass shit, I’d say the same for the opposite but idk many nazi mail providers.

    I guess I’ll have to pay, idk, maybe forward email. I’d pay proton if they’d just let me use imap/pop3 without some stupid “bridge.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        Yes, “and this is one of the limitations,” is what I mean. This isn’t just that one with the pretentious “AI” name, it’s also riseup, disroot, etc.

  • lemmyreader
    link
    fedilink
    English
    17 months ago

    Disroot stopped using RainLoop long time ago when people became aware of a security bug in RainLoop and the fact that the RainLoop project appeared to be dormant. I think Disroot switched to SnappyMail, and then to Roundcube.

  • lemmyvore
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -77 months ago

    “Sign-up works without non-free JavaScript” is a super weird criteria for selecting an email platform.

      • lemmyvore
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 months ago

        I’m still trying to understand what “proprietary JavaScript” means.

        • Possibly linuxOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          JavaScript that’s under a proprietary license (code that doesn’t give you the 4 freedoms)

          • lemmyvore
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            What I don’t understand is how they can tell. There’s no mechanism (that I’m aware of) for signalling the licensing of deployed (minified!) JS code. The development code has licensing and versioning and so on but none of that makes it into production. As far as the client is concerned it’s all proprietary.

            • Possibly linuxOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              27 months ago

              Technically that is what LibreJS is for. However, beyond LibreJS you can look at the code and see if it is similar to existing JavaScript frontends or libraries.

              It is a imperfect solution but it is better than just arbitrarily running programs in your browser or disabling JavaScript completely.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Apparently it’s (by default) everything that doesn’t explicitly specify a license (especially a FOSS one) within the javascript code of the page, which is a ridiculously huge portion of JS on the internet.

          What if they did this with HTML too? :p

          • lemmyreader
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            Apparently it’s (by default) everything that doesn’t explicitly specify a license (especially a FOSS one) within the javascript code of the page, which is a ridiculously huge portion of JS on the internet.

            It is never to late to start something and make people aware of problems and as far as I am concerned not only about software licenses but JavaScript as a security problem.

          • @tarix29
            link
            17 months ago

            It doesn’t apply to HTML because HTML is fundamentally not code that runs, but rather a markup. It’s just like how licensing a book under the GPL would be weird and unnatural, because it represents someone’s words. JS is code that runs on your computer, just like any other program

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -17 months ago

              where is the line drawn though, and who gets to decide?

              MANY people say “html code” even if you consider that wrong.

              Is a shell script or python “code”? Because it doesn’t directly translate to machine code?

              See what I’m getting at?

              • @tarix29
                link
                1
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                There is definitely a grey area, but HTML is pretty far away from it. HTML doesn’t “execute” and is very far from Turing completeness. You cannot write programs in it, and that is the key. Pure HTML is very much on the side of “rendering text” and not “running software.” Once we start talking about things like LaTex though, the line gets a lot harder to see. Note that whether HTML is “code” is irrelevant. The point is that whether it’s “code” or not, it is never a program.

                Edit: typo in “grey”

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                17 months ago

                Shell and python scripts are also code which is executed. HTML (at least back in the day) wasn’t really a network shipped executable, but more like markdown file which is just parsed and rendered

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  07 months ago

                  This feels a bit like the debate over whether a virus is “alive” or not. “But the virus/HTML has DNA/code.” “But it requires another cell/web browser in order to replicate/execute.” etc. 😄