Hacker News

points by BeetleB 3 days ago | 0 comments

I "solved" this for email years ago (as did many before me):

https://blog.nawaz.org/posts/2018/Sep/solving-my-email-probl...

Any communication channel that doesn't involve a whitelist (e.g. invite/approve) will have this problem. Email. Phones. Text messages.

If you want to fix this, the protocol must ensure the recipient first agrees to communicate with you. Until they do, all messages to them will be automatically blocked.

This solution works. Yes, there are always ways to get around it, but in practice, it cuts the nonsense by well over 90%.

[–] pixl97 3 days ago

Eh, at least for me I'd miss all kinds of text notifications from health providers if I did that.

[–] BeetleB 3 days ago

Nope. Just like anyone else, they get your permission to communicate, and you get their notifications.

Right now, a lot of orgs will send you a text message when you initiate business with them, and the first message always informs you how to get off their list. If you do nothing, you remain on the list. With my way, they just send a "special" message asking to connect with you. If you do nothing, you don't hear from them.

The difference between a whitelist and a blacklist (current approach) is you don't have to do the work to keep getting off people's list. They do the work to get on your list.

[–] pixl97 3 days ago

You're confusing permission to communicate with consistent sources they communicate from.

[–] BeetleB 3 days ago

If this were the protocol, they'd be incentivized to:

1. Make the sources consistent

2. Separating out marketing vs "serious" sources.