4 ms·
What I'm missing from the article is an explanation of what the control is. The email with no protection, which you'd expect to be the control, blocked 17% of s
by stereo 3y ago
What I'm missing from the article is an explanation of what the control is. The email with no protection, which you'd expect to be the control, blocked 17% of spam - 17% of what amount of spam? How does the author quantify the spam that's out there?
- RugnirViking 3y agoit says in the page that its because all the mails were on the same page (and presumably then scaped by the same bots), and yet a couple mails were recieved by other addresses and not by the unprotected one. So it would seem that the control is the set of unique mails recieved by all addresses. "Surprisingly, the unprotected email address appears to have blocked a spam email. Either that message wasn’t received, or an extra message was sent to one of the protected email addresses."
- progval 3y ago<a href="mailto:email@example.com">email</a> blocked 17% but email@example.com blocked 0%
- OJFord 3y agoReally? Seems like you'd have to actively try to be blocked by that, i.e. to extract 'email' but not the mailto. I suppose if you didn't actually scan the HTML, but instead all the contained text.. maybe it just tests an implementation detail basically.
- debugnik 3y agoMaybe their scrapper is so bad it actually captured "mailto:example@..."