this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
1401 points (99.0% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

36705 readers
1176 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I also reached out to them on Twitter but they directed me to this form. I followed up with them on Twitter with what happened in this screenshot but they are now ignoring me.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 243 points 1 year ago (22 children)

When you insist on implementing your own email address validation...

[–] [email protected] 129 points 1 year ago (10 children)

I have my own domain that uses a specific 2-letter ccTLD - it's a short domain variation of my surname (think "goo.gl" for Google). I've been using it for years, for my email.

Over those years, I have discovered an astonishing number of fuckheaded organisations whose systems insist I should have an email address with a "traditional" TLD at the end.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only useful email validation is "can I get an MX from that" and "does it understand what I'm saying in that SMTP". Anything else is someone that have too much free time.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It's easier to Google "email regex [language]" and copy the first result from stack overflow.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Definitely a timesaver. Much faster to get incorrect email validation that way then to try building it yourself.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
[–] [email protected] 180 points 1 year ago

but they are now ignoring me.

Hmm. Did you try giving them your email address?

[–] [email protected] 177 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Somebody made a shitty regex.

[–] [email protected] 71 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Probably, from what I can see the address in question isn't really that exotic. but an email regex that validates 100% correctly is near impossible. And then you still don't know if the email address actually exists.

I'd just take the user at their word and send an email with an activation link to the address that was supplied. If the address is invalid, the mail won't get delivered. No harm done.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually, one of our customers found out the hard way that there is harm in sending emails to invalid addresses. Too many kickbacks and cloud services think you're a bot. Prevented the customer from being able to send emails for 24 hours.

This is the result of them "requiring" an email for customers but entering a fake one if they didn't want to provide their email, and then trying to send out an email to everyone.

Our software has an option to disable that requirement but they didn't want to use it because they wanted their staff to remember to ask for an email address. It was not a great setup but they only had themselves to blame.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My guess is that would also occur with valid but non-existing e-mail addresses no? The regex would not be a remedy there anyway.

Of course you should only use the supplied e-mail address for things like mass mailings once it has been verified (i.e. the activation link from within the mail was clicked)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Email standard sucks anyway. By the official standard, [email protected] and [email protected] should be treated as separate users...

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Personally I don't think that sucks or is even wrong. Case-independent text processing is more cumbersome. 'U' and 'u' are two different symbols. And you have to make such rules for every language a part of your processing logic.

If people can take case-dependence for passwords (or official letters and their school papers), then it's also fine for email addresses.

The actual problem is cultural, coming from DOS and Windows where many things are case-independent. It's an acquired taste.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The best of validation is just to confirm that the email contains a @ and a . and if it does send it an email with a confirmation link.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

TLDs are valid in emails, as are IP V6 addresses, so checking for a . is technically not correct. For example a@b and a@[IPv6:2001:db8::1] are both valid email addresses.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel like using a@[IPv6:2001:db8::1] is asking for trouble everywhere online.

But its tempting to try out, not many people would expect this.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 121 points 1 year ago (5 children)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Exactly. After the @ they should just confirm there's at least one period. The rest is pretty much up in the air.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago

Which would still be technically wrong. There does not need to be a dot.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Even that would be technically incorrect. I believe you could put an A record on a TLD if you wanted. In theory, my email could be me@example.

Another hole to poke in the single dot regex: I could put in fake@com. with a dot trailing after the TLD, which would satisfy "dot after @" but is not an address to my knowledge.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 113 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The best way to validate an email address is to sent it an email validation link.

Anything outside of that is a waste of effort.

[–] [email protected] 70 points 1 year ago (4 children)

That is 100% a chatbot using a regex email validator someone wrote as a meme that the chipotle dev copied from stack overflow without context.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency 107 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (15 children)

That is 100% a bot, and whoever made the bot just stuck in a custom regex to match “[email protected]” instead of using a standardized domain validation lib that actually handles cases like yours correctly.

Edit: the bots are redirecting you to bots are redirecting you to bots. This is not a bug. This is by design.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 105 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Modern customer service is about willfully designed layers of broken system engineered specifically to frustrate the majority of people that can't regulate their emotions. It's always a series of about "12 doors" you have to cross through that are exceedingly difficult to pass through. They are designed to sap your energy with the hope that you eventually reach a boiling point, hang up, get distracted, go on with your day and never follow up out of fear of starting the same process again.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 63 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I work for Chipotle Corporate. Please send me your email address. I'll make sure it gets fixed.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nice try I've heard that before

[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

There should be an '@,' followed by a domain ([email protected]).

What is your email address?

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Look, I get it, but first, what's your email address?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If that's their standard, you can probably just edit the html to make the login button active and then sign-in.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 148 points 1 year ago (19 children)

Nah, it's just a old school chat bot following a predefined flow chart. And in this flowchart someone implemented an improper email check.

It's pretty much the same as if there was just a website with an email field which then complains about a non valid email which in fact is very valid. And this is pretty common, the official email definition isn't even properly followed by most mail providers (long video but pretty funny and interesting if you're interested in the topic).

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

You can use symbols like [ ] . { } ~ = | $ in the local-part (bit before the @) of email addresses. They're all perfectly valid but a lot of email validators reject them. You can even use spaces as long as it's using quotation marks, like

"hello world"@example.com

A lot of validators try to do too much. Just strip spaces from the start and end, look for an @ and a ., and send an email to it to validate it. You don't really care if the email address looks valid; you just care whether it can actually receive email, so that's what you should be testing for.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Pepper is making you salty

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're talking to a bot that has a crappy parser and doesn't understand what a subdomain is.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This is why you never attempt to validate an email address beyond requiring an @ followed by a period, and send a verification email

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My Ameriprise account has its own email address because the fuckers don't believe any email starting with email@ is a real email. I've called them a million times and got them to file a bug, which they did, and then closed as won't fix.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] captain_aggravated 33 points 1 year ago

Sounds like they don't want your business anymore.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why are you keeping track of the age of your Chipotle account?

[–] lingh0e 40 points 1 year ago

Because those points add up, playa.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

Reply, that you'd be happy to provide your e-mail. but first, you must verify them, my having them provide an e-mail.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

sorry to answer your post ill need an email address

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

No, dots are NOT necessary. Actually you do not even need to supply a domain or a top level domain because mails then default to the default system which is usually localhost.

But even for routed mail there doesn't need to be a dot.

There is still valid Bang-Adressing for UUCP routed emails:

!bigsite!foovax!barbox!me

This is a valid email which basically means "send my email to bigsite, from there to foovax, then to barbox, to the user me."

And if you are in a playful mood - mix FQDN and BANG addressing...

A couple of years ago I made Hotmail crash by sending a mail to googlemail.de!hotmail.com!googlemail.com!hotmail.de!googlemail.ca!hotmail.ca!googlemail.fr!hotmail.fr!... [repeated it for 32kByte] ...!myuseraccount - their server literally crashed completely all over the world for like 15 minutes. I am so proud of myself but then it was their fault for not complying to RfC822.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I signed up to an insurance company here in Japan with [email protected] and they later changed their rules and I couldn't sign in at all. They told me to open a new account. I didn't want to pay them once let alone twice. Never doing business with them again.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Get the bot to tell you it's connecting you to someone like you did, then give it a fake email address to get past that point.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And that's why I want to talk to a person.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago

AI conversation

load more comments
view more: next ›