Hard to beat Outlook 2007 which had some "smart tags" feature that all referenced "5iantlavalamp.com", and things started breaking when that domain expired.
replyI simultaneously don’t believe this and fully believe this is something they would do. Do you have any sources on this?
replyIt's amazing how little information has survived: the only reference I can find right away is https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/22812691/What-is-...
replyI was working in anti-spam at the time, so I was eyeballing a lot of raw email dumps and writing analysis scripts for "anomalous" urls, so it popped up fairly frequently.
The primary problem is we can't search through time via WayBack Machine where a lot of these things have gone. Took me a while the other day to surface the Choco-Banana Shake Hang which Microsoft deleted from their production site.
replyhttps://web.archive.org/web/20000608173453/http://support.mi...
I'm struggling to find information about this and it's extremely interesting.
replyWould you please explain more?
It's hard to remember many details from almost 20 years ago, I just remember coming across it in email spools while writing anti-spam analysis scripts. Only mention I can find nowadays is https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/22812691/What-is-....
replyThis story is ludicrous… yet, it seems to check out. https://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/rules/25_uri... says this is one of the "Top 125 domains whitelisted by SURBL", and there's an answer on the hyphen site about it: https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/22812691/What-is-.... Can someone with a Bottom-Surgery account tell us the details?
replyMicrosoft is the 4th largest company in the world.
replyThere should be a long list of companies whose policies are worse than theirs.
That doesn't follow. I would expect the list of companies worst than Microsoft to be about 4 items long
replyAt least Bluesky has an excuse of not being a Fortune 50 company. What’s Microsoft’s excuse?
reply‘We built it 30 years ago, it’s sort of compatible with everything and we will never deprecate.’
replyIt’s not a good excuse…
Sending your id to a social media IS a scam.
replyBy email... Just to add insult to injury
replyWhat definition of the word scam are you using here? What promise of a product that you pay for that isn't being delivered, with uploading your id to a site on the Internet?
replyI'm not gonna get hoodwinked into highbrow shenanigans. Social media doesn't need IDs to work, demanding it is a scam.
replyDefining a word isn't "highbrow shenanigans", although I guess it depends on how you define that.
replyRhetoric won't save you from the embarrassing situation you created for yourself. You accused something of being a scam without understanding the definition of the word. Now that your claim has been challenged, you're trying to redefine terms and argue around the issue rather than admit you were wrong.
replyFrom dictionary.cambridge.org:
a dishonest plan for making money or getting an advantage, especially one that involves tricking people:
replyI can easily see a social media company demanding an ID falling under this definition if the accuser believes that the actual use of said ID will be different or more expansive than implied. That is not an unreasonable assumption, IMO.