Live data from Hacker News

Plunk: The open source email platform

github.com

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#71
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an IRC deamon runs on the only server left in the world .. what's the point? Who's going to log in?

the question was if it is self hosting or not, and eg slack and discord are not. so regardless of how many humans are still alive to use it, on the only server still running, the survivors could use something self hosting whereas they could not use one that required a system that was down.

The answer given was:

> If the bombs drop and civilization is over and me, and my home lab are the only survivors, can I still use that software?

which rules out any software used to connect to non existant other servers or people.

Sure, the software "works" .. it just doesn't do anything .. ie. it can't be "used".

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#72
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That certainly rules out all chat, email, and peer to peer software. Other than that, what's your power supply like?

I think you are mistaking interoperability with a network with dependency with a propietary service from a specific vendor. These are different things.

see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41179737

Comms software can't be used if there is nothing to Comm with.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#73
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because it’s rarely used for anything other than unwanted email, aka spam.

Or batched transactional emails like monthly statements that need to have user/region specific variants. https://www.twilio.com/docs/sendgrid/api-reference/transacti...

No one serious is using mail merge to send transactional emails.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#74
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi. I recently took over engineering at Postmark. Noted! Thanks for the feedback.

While you are here, I have been asking for years to have better access control on API keys so they can only use assigned servers. So my staging cant send prod emails...

API tokens are server specific aren't they?

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#75
post #24

Having recently adopted Resend and skimmed a bunch of different email APIs, I'm still waiting to find a single provider whose API supports Stripe-style idempotency [1] so that I can guarantee I don't send the same email through their API multiple times. I'd like to confidently avoid accidentally spamming a user if i.e. a background job retries multiple times due to an unrelated error, or merely from failing to receiv…

Hi. I recently took over engineering at Postmark. Noted! Thanks for the feedback.

I understand this change might be a large undertaking to implement across the entire API, and although it would be good to do everywhere, it’s primarily just the send email API that needs it.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#76
post #24

Having recently adopted Resend and skimmed a bunch of different email APIs, I'm still waiting to find a single provider whose API supports Stripe-style idempotency [1] so that I can guarantee I don't send the same email through their API multiple times. I'd like to confidently avoid accidentally spamming a user if i.e. a background job retries multiple times due to an unrelated error, or merely from failing to receiv…

Be sure to check out Waypoint (usewaypoint.com). It's an email API with a tightly integrated template builder and has idempotent requests (https://www.usewaypoint.com/docs/idempotent-requests).

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#77
Email platforms are actually two platforms, composition, and delivery.

In the before times, I helped build and was a lead engineer on a team building a delivery platform from scratch, with very minor composition bolted on. (For a time reference, this was before HTML email was even common.)

Some of the lessons from then are very relevant still today. A big one that comes to my mind is 'idempotent' email isn't really possible, because SMTP has no 'send iff message-id has not been received' primitive. You can get to try-send-only-until-2.5.0-code, but even that can be non-trivial engineering. We went to a rather large degree of effort to do that ourselves, since repeat emails are a terrible signal, but I think thats only a marginal benefit to the larger operators.

Idempotent delivery even isn't a direct benefit to advertisers or most sending actors: Primarily, for the majority of the market, they don't really care about duplicated deliveries below some statistical model, since the costs are heavily externalized. Secondarily, since those parts of the industry depend on out-of-band read-indicators, engineering to improve delivery idempotentcy doesn't reflect into a market advantage.

Email's gotten prettier in the two decades since then, but its quality at every point in the stack I think has gotten worse. I routinely have to firewall whole ASNs because the bigger bulk operators (salesforce marketing cloud im looking at you) have no functional mechanism to call out particularly spammy customers, and thats after aggressive greylisting. Sure, the greylisting cuts out >95% of my spam, but the noise level on that last 5% is still horrendous. Forwarding with headers to abuse@ should be a universal paradigm but thats 99% a noop these days.

Given the lesser upside and relative difficulty of the delivery problem, it seems only natural that most of the effort in email platforms these days is in composition. Even if you want to work on the delivery half, with IP reputation, aggressive antispam, and the general enshittification of all things email, the barrier to entry is orders of magnitude higher than it was in 2000. I don't want to say its impossible, but I think you'll have a bad time if you're trying to do it anywhere that doesnt have enough size/inertia or money that email receiving operators choose to negotiate with you rather than preemptively block you.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#78
post #76
post #24

Having recently adopted Resend and skimmed a bunch of different email APIs, I'm still waiting to find a single provider whose API supports Stripe-style idempotency [1] so that I can guarantee I don't send the same email through their API multiple times. I'd like to confidently avoid accidentally spamming a user if i.e. a background job retries multiple times due to an unrelated error, or merely from failing to receiv…

Be sure to check out Waypoint (usewaypoint.com). It's an email API with a tightly integrated template builder and has idempotent requests ( https://www.usewaypoint.com/docs/idempotent-requests ).

Thank you! I'm not sure how this didn't come up in what I felt was a pretty comprehensive round of Google searching, but it looks like a fantastic option. If only they had free allotment or something <$20/mo for a small number of emails :) But otherwise this looks a the solution I was looking for.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#79
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the question was if it is self hosting or not, and eg slack and discord are not. so regardless of how many humans are still alive to use it, on the only server still running, the survivors could use something self hosting whereas they could not use one that required a system that was down.

The answer given was: > If the bombs drop and civilization is over and me, and my home lab are the only survivors, can I still use that software? which rules out any software used to connect to non existant other servers or people. Sure, the software "works" .. it just doesn't do anything .. ie. it can't be "used".

Yes it does.

That ircd servers in the example above can still be used with a bot as an automation tool (at that point as the only survivor the security would be the least of your concerns), as a way to invent imaginary friends to pretend your life is less miserable, whatever.

Or say you have a mastodon or pixelfed instance. Sure no other instance will ever connect and no other user will ever be able to see your posts...but you. Which could include some fond memories you want to keep.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#80
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer given was: > If the bombs drop and civilization is over and me, and my home lab are the only survivors, can I still use that software? which rules out any software used to connect to non existant other servers or people. Sure, the software "works" .. it just doesn't do anything .. ie. it can't be "used".

Yes it does. That ircd servers in the example above can still be used with a bot as an automation tool (at that point as the only survivor the security would be the least of your concerns), as a way to invent imaginary friends to pretend your life is less miserable, whatever. Or say you have a mastodon or pixelfed instance. Sure no other instance will ever connect and no other user will ever be able to see your posts…

It's a pointless intermediary when you have the bots directly there on your last remaining server though.

These semantic games are obfuscating the real issue here; tying the definition of "self hosting" to the "If the bombs drop and civilization is over and me, and my home lab are the only survivors" scenario is less useful than a two handed pit saw to a sole survivor.

I appreciate your assist to what I consider to be fragmede's "foot in keyboard" moment of poor definition, I suspect we're all better served with a better definition.

Post reply on HN