> I agree with you that having a service 100% free with 0 compromise is not possible, well, it is possible but someone is paying somewhere (see below)

> I disagree that the European union is throwing rules that makes no sense. Privacy should be the default, and if your business is not viable without tracking, perhaps it should not exist.

here is 2 examples of free services I am using daily :

signal : https://moneymodels.org/business-models/how-does-signal-make... (I donated)

mastodon : backed by https://sdf.org/ (I have not donated but wish to do so)

I believe that a more "socialist" approach is possible (pay if you can model so everyone can use the service regardless of their income) It will not scale to the size of facebook, but irc, mastodon and matrix.org already shows that federation works (not without pain).

The startup ecosystem based on advertising money may suffer, but I think this just lead to a better internet in the long run.

I worked on a multi-million dollar transformation project for the federal government.

Nobody had any idea where anything was. Eventually they found the 'latest PowerPoint' in their email, instead of SharePoint.

Except it wasn't the latest. They just thought it was. So they updated it, and distributed it, and then looked stupid and had to do it again. And lost all respect and trust from the customer.

And then when the project failed the auditor came in to try to figure out why, and it was reasonably obvious.

Meanwhile the taxpayer is paying for this. That's me and you. If this mid-sized transformation project has a $10m budget and every person wastes just a minute every hour looking for a file -- conservative, in my experience -- then we're talking hundreds of thousands of wasted dollars.

So, yeah. Borderline criminal in my view.

I would also add (but this is not email per se) : no adoption for GPG/PGP this makes your cryptographic signature a bare textfile attachement.

both microsoft and gmail spam filter = blackbox.

If people could be trusted to manage their mail server we wouldn't have this problem, but IoT crapware is still listening on port 23 till this very day and the manuals still state that you need to disable the firewall and forward all traffic to your shitty webcam for it to work. Reporting this abuse to the carrying ISPs is about as useless as shouting my complaints down the toilet.

Until both IoT production companies and individual consumers take responsibility for the awful internet created by these maliciously incompetent users and the laughably bad IoT devices they buy, I'm not removing this filter rule from my mail server.

I do usually get a notification that something hit quarantine so if it sounds important I can still see it, but I've never had to release mail banned for this reason so far.

> My mail server occasionally receives mail from residential ISPs and it's literally always spam.

I sent mail from my home isp for years, until people like you made unfeasible.

> I do usually get a notification that something hit quarantine so if it sounds important I can still see it, but I've never had to release mail banned for this reason so far.

Most small operators refused to allowlist me even after making phone calls, etc.

> I sent mail from my home isp for years, until people like you made unfeasible. I've accepted mail from home ISPs for years but a recent-ish (±5 years ago) but short wave of spam from botnets made me turn on the spam filter on my new server.

> Most small operators refused to allowlist me even after making phone calls, etc. With my setup you won't even have to call me because I'll probably whitelist your server anyway. May take a day depending on how recent the latest quarantine report was, but that's no different from normal email anyway. My spam threshold is quite high so if you take the normal measures (SPF/DKIM/reverse PTR/etc.) you probably won't even hit the spam filter.

Nice proving the OP orginal opening statement, well done ....

Is there one that actually states it isn't OK, that I'm unaware of?

It perhaps goes against the spirit of the RFCs and other documentation written at the time, but that is understandable because a lot of that stuff was written from the standpoint of being able to trust people on the Internet, including that they fully understand and have properly secured the hosts under their purview…

I send mail from home just fine, though my connection is through an ISP that is generally identified as offering commercial accounts (AAISP). You do have to make sure that you have SPF and DKIM configured but that is the case elsewhere too.

My machines see quite a lot of activity (SSH login attempts, attempts at brute force logins & scans for known vulnerability in old versions of HTTP(S) hosted software, and more, not just attempts to send junk mail) from what appears to be compromised machines on residential connections.

was always searching with / and "n"

example #1 : a teenager starting his first job should not have his data shared by default (it is useless for him and increase(I think) the risk that his identity gets stolen)

example #2 : when you go to a lender, he could say, yeah, we check with equifax, maybe you want to opt-in with them.

The fact that they are unavoidable are the problem in my opinion. It creates a kind of monopoly. If it was opt-in, maybe we would see more alternatives companies offering the same kind of service with better security and customer service.

P.S : There is an error in my file and I never bother to fix it, I never lived there, it is clearly a fraud attempt and this is their error, not mine to fix.

P.P.S : not an expert on the topic and maybe I am missing out on important details

also see the movies : "my teheran for sale" and "Persepolis"

as much as I hate USA foreign policy, it is also possible that Iranians want peace and freedom outside of foreign interests.

not everything is black and white.