Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

mako.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 400 posts

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#341

Post by crazygringo »

ffpip wrote: post #333
crazygringo wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you're talking about. I get order confirmations from retail stores all the time with full details of my order, every item listed in full detail, last 4 digits of credit card used, etc. I see no change in this over time, nor do I know why companies would even care that an e-mail provider (including Google) would be able to read that information. I don't think this phenomenon exists at all. The only t…

> I see no change in this over time, nor do I know why companies would even care that an e-mail provider (including Google) would be able to read that information. I don't think this phenomenon exists at all. https://thehustle.co/09032020-amazon-order-confirmations/ https://www.macobserver.com/link/amazon-no-longer-including-...

Thanks, but so as far as I can tell from that, Amazon is the only company to have made this change, and it's pure speculation as to why.

I just checked my e-mails, and Target and Wal-Mart still include an itemized list in your order confirmation e-mail. So does Best Buy, J. Crew, GAP, Shopify, eBay, and literally every other store I order from.

So a single company made this change, and nobody knows why? That's not a phenomenon or trend.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#342

Post by danaris »

jesuscript wrote: post #182
LadyCailin wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people are into self flagellation. That’s fine. It’s when they think they’re better than you because of it that it becomes insufferable.

Look, it’s one thing to say “I cannot live without my kids”, and have some asshole say “ditch them. Move, adopt new ones, you’ll see how stupid that attachment is”. You guys are literally acting like e-mail is some cornerstone of a life well lived. I’ll agree with the insufferable part though :) The rest of your comment, I’ll just attribute to you projecting, which we all do, no one is better.

You're the one attaching moral judgements to it. Speaking of projecting.

We're just saying that email is either necessary or a massive increase in convenience for engaging in a wide array of common digital interactions, including some that are extremely hard to get away from (utilities, banks, etc), and others that are part of what makes life worth living, rather than just subsistence survival (streaming services, online games, other luxuries).

Doing without something that's technically possible to avoid, but wastes a whole lot of your time and mental energy, and does not materially harm you in any way, does not make you a better person. Nor does it make you a worse person. It's something that's a personal choice.

Smugly presenting yourself as somehow better than us because you do without such things does make you a worse person.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#343

Post by danaris »

jasec57322 wrote: post #198
arglebargle123 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not defending big G here in the slightest but you can do that with Gmail aliases too: Someaddr+alias@gmail resolves to Someaddr@gmail.

Most providers now block Gmail addresses containing . or +

This has not been my experience.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#344

Post by jesuscript »

danaris wrote: post #342
jesuscript wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, it’s one thing to say “I cannot live without my kids”, and have some asshole say “ditch them. Move, adopt new ones, you’ll see how stupid that attachment is”. You guys are literally acting like e-mail is some cornerstone of a life well lived. I’ll agree with the insufferable part though :) The rest of your comment, I’ll just attribute to you projecting, which we all do, no one is better.

You're the one attaching moral judgements to it. Speaking of projecting. We're just saying that email is either necessary or a massive increase in convenience for engaging in a wide array of common digital interactions, including some that are extremely hard to get away from (utilities, banks, etc), and others that are part of what makes life worth living, rather than just subsistence survival (streaming services, on…

I think you are just wrong. I simply provided some advice to someone who feels they can’t do without something that is possible to do without (or at least in a much more reduced manner).

But I do like the irony, some of you inferred I said “I am better than you”. The words are written by you - “makes you a worse person”, which I don’t need to make any inference on, I know what you said.

I’d give the same advice to anyone that believes they can’t live without coffee. Whether they drink it or not is none of my business, but their exclamation of an impossibility is something I might chime in on.

Start the thread again, I picked a specific thing to address with the GP. Don’t care if he/she uses email, the whole world uses email lol.

Just for shits and giggles:

I get a few text alerts from my bank, I check things out with the bank app. I read the utility mail (yes the paper bill) once a month. No email involved. If I lost my email, my bank and electricity would be fine. So would my internet. It’s not impossible.

Morality seeping into this discussion and holier than thou interpretations (casted on to me), are interesting and I’ll consider everyone’s input carefully and adjust going forward.

Edit:

I use email.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#345

Post by yieldcrv »

moffkalast wrote: post #159
yieldcrv wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anti-fragility, permission to fail, rapid iteration basically risk isn't controversial, and it rapidly iterates to more and more resilient systems

Well it certainly needs another decade or two of iterations before it can replace what we have now, I imagine.

I don't think it needs to replace anything, that's not a goal to me

I think it needs to be permissionless and autonomous

I think it needs to compete on overhead costs and payment style (pay to write once, store and read indefinitely for free. compared to a SaaS service)

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#346

Post by rglullis »

delusional wrote: post #276
rglullis wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has so many misunderstandings about how internet protocols and cryptography works, I don't even know where to start responding.

Give it a shot.

> If your choice in any way depends on the configuration of the mail server then your decentralized system has accomplished absolutely nothing, because the mail provider is still the gatekeeper.

This is a strawman. If you are talking about a decentralized system, you don't need the mail provider to send the message for you. Your email application would (and should) be able to resolve the IP address of the destination server for you, and it would (and should) be able to verify that the end server is who the sender expects it to be.

So, what would happen is that if you are on ENS', your view of the network would follow the consensus established by the ENS' chain. If you try to send a message to an email server that is on ENS, they would fail to provide a valid confirmation that they can respond for the IP address that you think they are on. It would be akin to failing a DNSSEC query.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#347

Post by int_19h »

switch007 wrote: post #100
int_19h wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making sure that your domain registration is always current is not a difficult thing, though. You can register for fairly long periods of time, and set up multiple alerts to manually renew long before it expires.

My register doesn’t allow registrations longer than 1 year. Their reason: “ We've found that longer registration periods lead to a higher chance of customers losing or forgetting their account details or missing notifications and ultimately letting their domains expire due to outdated contact information or expired credit card details.” I’m wondering whether that’s valid and if I should find a new registrar…

The reasoning might well be valid in general, but only you can decide whether it's applicable to you or not.

FWIW, name.com lets me renew my domain for 10 years at a time, so it's definitely not something that all registrars do.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#348

Post by immibis »

rglullis wrote: post #340
immibis wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has its own problems though: what if you lose access to your key? The other day someone suggested making real estate NFTs. What happens if the "owner" of some real estate loses their key?

> what if you lose access to your key? Social recovery: https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/01/11/recovery.html > The other day someone suggested making real estate NFTs. Looking at the current implementations , it is a terrible idea. But it doesn't mean that the problem can not be solved. > What happens if the "owner" of some real estate loses their key? Just spitballing here: take the idea of social recovery further to…

But then it's just a government database. Might as well just use a government database - much simpler.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#349

Post by immibis »

delusional wrote: post #217
rglullis wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now you know why there are still some people that still take "web3" seriously. It's the only system where you are not at the mercy of some external entity to be always benevolent. Seriously, ENS and Handshake alone should be enough of a reason to silence all of those who keep repeating "but blockchain has no real world applications".

For the sake of argument, let's say that all email was hosted on ENS. Let's say that somebody , doesn't matter who, went ahead and forked the chain into ENS'. We now have two disconnected chains, ENS and ENS'. If I were to buy a domain on ENS', i would not also own the domain on ENS, so someone else buys that. Who now receives the mail sent to that domain? If your choice in any way depends on the configuration of the…

That's the beauty of it - we'd have a decentralized marketplace for deciding which one counts! Every email sender can choose to use one or the other, and the best one should win in the marketplace of ideas!

/s

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#350

Post by immibis »

zaik wrote: post #180
feanaro wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all of them did. Domains shouldn't be related to citizenship anyway.

Then you probably should not buy an .eu domain. The registry states very clearly that .eu is in fact tied to your citizenship.

All domains come with various catches.
Post reply on HN