Live data from Hacker News

Email could have been X.400 times better

buttondown.com

11–20 of 211 posts

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#11

This is an example of how simplicity won over features. Not even then, when people with access to computers were probably in the thousands, would anyone liked to type "C=no; ADMD=; PRMD=uninett; O=uninett; S=alvestrand; G=harald" just like in the example of the article.

You were not supposed to type it out, you looked it up using your X.500 directory.

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#13
post #2

> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over

Not trying to be rude, but If you put your unsubscribe page behind a captcha I am going to mark you as spam and move on.

I don't unsubsubscribe unless I explicitly subscribed in the past. If I did not subscribe in the first place then it's spam (exception for small businesses who may not know better in which case I'll delete or unsubscribe).

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#14
>> SMTP "“didn’t win because it was ‘better,’” he argued, but “just because it was easier to implement."

Yes - and this is actually really important! It's true of most of the important early internet technologies. It's the entire reason "internet" standards won over "telco" (in this case ITU) standards - the latter could only be deployed by big coordinated efforts, while internet standards let individual decentralized admins hook their sites together.

Did any of the ITU standards win? In the end, internet swallowed telephones and everything is now VOIP. I think the last of the X standards left is X509?

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#15
post #11

This is an example of how simplicity won over features. Not even then, when people with access to computers were probably in the thousands, would anyone liked to type "C=no; ADMD=; PRMD=uninett; O=uninett; S=alvestrand; G=harald" just like in the example of the article.

You were not supposed to type it out, you looked it up using your X.500 directory.

All we need is an x.500 directory of all addresses in the world, which won't be abused by anyone at anytime!

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#16
post #7
post #2

> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over

If I cannot just click a button and unsubscribe, guess what, you are malicious spam.

And if you can't figure out how to make an unsubscribe page that doesn't require a captcha (and is triggered by email scanners) you are incompetent. Claude can figure it out.

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#17
post #2

> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over

> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on.

Which spammers and marketers would have loved.

I have "load remote content" disabled on my e-mail client so that tracking graphics/pixels do not leak such information to the sender.

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#18
post #2

> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over

I think you're referring to things like tracking pixels, whereas the author was likely referring to _actual_ email read receipts, where the sender can request a read receipt, and the receiver's MUA will prompt them to send one.

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#19
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not trying to be rude, but If you put your unsubscribe page behind a captcha I am going to mark you as spam and move on.

I don't unsubsubscribe unless I explicitly subscribed in the past. If I did not subscribe in the first place then it's spam (exception for small businesses who may not know better in which case I'll delete or unsubscribe).

There are unsubscribe headers that are used by mail user agents like mutt to unsubscribe from mailing list managers like mailman.

These are "scanner-proof" so far but support in clients like Outlook or Gmail is non-existent.

Re: Email could have been X.400 times better

#20
post #14

>> SMTP "“didn’t win because it was ‘better,’” he argued, but “just because it was easier to implement." Yes - and this is actually really important! It's true of most of the important early internet technologies. It's the entire reason "internet" standards won over "telco" (in this case ITU) standards - the latter could only be deployed by big coordinated efforts, while internet standards let individual decentralize…

And you could add any number of the big standards group-based standards that a great deal of blood, sweat, and tears were poured into. Not universally the case, but more true than false.
Post reply on HN