reckless intuitions of an epistemic hygienist (gustavolacerda) wrote,

spam in 2012

I was just asking someone to not publish my email address inside a plain mailto link, lest spammers harvest my email. I asked that he use instead (a) ReCaptcha (b) an image (c) a JavaScript trick, or (d) a less important email address. He didn't want to bother, so I argued that this is an important email address for me, so that I want to keep the signal-to-noise ratio high; and that once spammers have your address, there's no going back.

Spam filtering is not perfect, and I occasionally see false negatives my Inbox, and false positives in my Spam folder (when I feel brave enough to look through the junk). I always thought that the problem of spam would get worse and worse, given the economic incentives involved, but this doesn't seem to have happened: probabilistic spam filtering does indeed seem to have had a lasting impact; and I'm sure that we also have people who fight this battle at a higher level, occasionally blocking sections of the Internet that send a lot of spam.

My email experience has been quite reasonable in recent years, but I'm not sure how much of this is due to my own hygiene, and how much is due to good spam filtering.

Am I still justified in asking people to not expose my email in mailto links?

mirror of this post
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 15 comments