Mutual aid spam is becoming a problem on the Fediverse.

And to be sure, I’m not against mutual aid. What I am against is spam.

This person has not verified who she is – or even if the profile picture is hers. Additional research on her name states she is a scammer with a record of grifting. I am therefore skeptical that any donations will help anyone in need.

Folks, please be cautious with mutual aid requests. Yes, people sometimes need help. But people also lie.

@fediverse@lemmy.world

  • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    173
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Yep.

    I feel the fediverse should lean towards “overly aggressive” when combatting spam, before it takes root, even with all the negatives that brings.

    • farcaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      89
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      I agree. E-mail is the original federated service. And 50 years later e-mail spam remains a big problem. I hope Fedi projects can get spam mitigations on-par with email before spammers start getting serious about this place.

      • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        Unfortunately, email solved the spam problem by becoming centralized AF. Now everything requires a “reputation”.

        • mcz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          “Email solved the spam problem by becoming centralizing” yeah most of the spam I get is from gmail or has a reply-to header with gmail address

          • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            That’s just the spam that gets through! On my ancient ISP-provided email it’s primarily distributed via compromised accounts from the same provider. And what I see targeting the corporate world tends to come from newly setup email servers or newly setup accounts on paid email providers

      • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I’d argue that telephones are the original federated service. There were fits and starts to getting the proprietary Bell/AT&T network to play nice with devices or lines not operated by them, but the initial system for long distance calling over the North American Numbering Plan made it possible for an AT&T customer to dial non-AT&T customers by the early 1950’s, and set the groundwork for the technical feasibility of the breakup of the AT&T/Bell monopoly.

        We didn’t call it spam then, but unsolicited phone calls have always been a problem.

        • kudra@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          What we really need (and have always needed) is an update to the legal frameworks that classify what networks are and what protections are in place for users to ensure interoperability. The Internet has been the wild west for too bloody long, and the extractors and their monopolies need to be put away. That’s why they have been so happy to jump in with Donny Diaper at this point, because he’s letting them not only continue with impunity, but bring back company scrip.

          • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            That’s why I think the history of the U.S. phone system is so important. AT&T had to be dragged into interoperability by government regulation nearly every step of the way, but ended up needing to invent and publish the technical standards that made federation/interoperability possible, after government agencies started mandating them. The technical infeasibility of opening up a proprietary network has been overcome before, with much more complexity at the lower OSI layers, including defining new open standards regarding the physical layer of actual copper lines and switches.