131–140 of 235 posts
I recently thought about email being based on such an old standard and then I wondered if maybe it didn't matter anymore, because most of the web is moving to gmail, and my guess is (and somebody please correct me) that when I send an email from gmail to gmail, that no actual SMTP is involved? I'm assuming that they have some internal protocol that is just adapter'd to "Email" at the very end?
The main failure in mail standards is a lack of explicit utf8 clean support lhs@rhs -if this got fixed (it's often called universal acceptance) a lot of things about mail as an ecology would improve. I have view on the spam thing. The whole "your idea will not work because" meme is hugely destructive of innovation in email. It sucks energy and mindshare. It's classic old timer put down. What would (imnsho opinion) ha…
> What would (imnsho opinion) have fixed spam is sender pays. I've debated this with a lot of people. We're 50/50 on it. Fifty agree with me, fifty million don't. Along with the billions of spam SMS that are also supposed to be sender-pays, sadly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been a happy Fastmail customer too, until I was made aware that you can impersonate other Fastmail customers by just spoofing the email address. Their servers just happily accept it. SPF and DKIM all pass with flying colours, and the only way you'd know it's happened is if you have DMARC on and happen to notice a pass in the report you don't remember sending. Well, that is if the recipient doesn't reply to the s…
Is there anything in the email headers that shows the authenticated user? My preference would be that email providers rewrite the From: header to match the authenticated user and that the sender uses the Reply-To: header to direct replies to a destination of their choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't imagine who would waste their money in re-invented umbrellas, maybe it is an hipster thing.
Just as one example, wind resistant umbrellas have an actual useful feature regular umbrellas don't have.
I really want to see some innovation in the email space. The landscape is like a sea of false promises and dashed dreams. SMTP is one of the bread-and-butters of the internet, yet it just doesn't seem to be moving forward (maybe that's for the best), and no one's building extensions on top of it. Maybe I'm naive in thinking it was possible but we could have avoided this whole "make an account on X messenger so we can…
Email is "good enough". The real hole is "instant messaging". Somehow every few years we got from ICQ to AIM to Paltalk to Skype to Facebook Messenger to Slack to ... (at least Altassian had the decency to take HipChat behind the woodshed and shoot it) The strange thing is that these services dry up, blow away, get replaced, but they don't seem to improve on what came before. There is a standard, XMPP, but the only p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
filters cannot be applied retroactively, however. be sure to write your filters before receiving anything. Especially important if you're importing your email for the first time... and insanely annoying if you want to debug such an advanced filter. as always with fastmail: It has great features... but always with a massive caveat.
Ooooof, wow, thanks for the heads up. There's no way that's going to work... I edit my filters and apply them retroactively... There's no way I can set them in stone the first time. :( is there any email service that doesn't have this limitation?
One nice thing, for me at least, is it runs prior to the email ending up in your inbox and I am uses to Outlook rules were rules execute post arrival.
The main failure in mail standards is a lack of explicit utf8 clean support lhs@rhs -if this got fixed (it's often called universal acceptance) a lot of things about mail as an ecology would improve. I have view on the spam thing. The whole "your idea will not work because" meme is hugely destructive of innovation in email. It sucks energy and mindshare. It's classic old timer put down. What would (imnsho opinion) ha…
> What would (imnsho opinion) have fixed spam is sender pays. Alternate but similar - sender holds the email until the receiver fetches: https://cr.yp.to/im2000.html I'm not sure it actually helps that much to cut down spam but anything is worth a try at this point.
I really want to see some innovation in the email space. The landscape is like a sea of false promises and dashed dreams. SMTP is one of the bread-and-butters of the internet, yet it just doesn't seem to be moving forward (maybe that's for the best), and no one's building extensions on top of it. Maybe I'm naive in thinking it was possible but we could have avoided this whole "make an account on X messenger so we can…
Email is "good enough". The real hole is "instant messaging". Somehow every few years we got from ICQ to AIM to Paltalk to Skype to Facebook Messenger to Slack to ... (at least Altassian had the decency to take HipChat behind the woodshed and shoot it) The strange thing is that these services dry up, blow away, get replaced, but they don't seem to improve on what came before. There is a standard, XMPP, but the only p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been a happy Fastmail customer too, until I was made aware that you can impersonate other Fastmail customers by just spoofing the email address. Their servers just happily accept it. SPF and DKIM all pass with flying colours, and the only way you'd know it's happened is if you have DMARC on and happen to notice a pass in the report you don't remember sending. Well, that is if the recipient doesn't reply to the s…
Is there anything in the email headers that shows the authenticated user? My preference would be that email providers rewrite the From: header to match the authenticated user and that the sender uses the Reply-To: header to direct replies to a destination of their choice.
The main failure in mail standards is a lack of explicit utf8 clean support lhs@rhs -if this got fixed (it's often called universal acceptance) a lot of things about mail as an ecology would improve. I have view on the spam thing. The whole "your idea will not work because" meme is hugely destructive of innovation in email. It sucks energy and mindshare. It's classic old timer put down. What would (imnsho opinion) ha…
> What would (imnsho opinion) have fixed spam is sender pays. I've debated this with a lot of people. We're 50/50 on it. Fifty agree with me, fifty million don't. I propose a scheme where the sender pays e.g. 5 ct per e-mail (low enough that it does not matter for legitimate use, but high enough to make spam unprofitable). BUT with the following twist: The receiver can generate API tokens that allow free e-mail deliv…
Then you funnel all that junk into a special folder (black hole) that you can either ignore or check if you are expecting a legit request for your attention.
The more I think about it, the more I love this idea. All email that shows up in your inbox is there because you have to explicitly allowed it.