161–170 of 217 posts
I read this article and was surprised when I reached the end because the whole thing felt like it was setting the stage for some announcement or new thing. But nothing came..? Forgive me if I'm being thick but what was the takeaway?
"A crummy ad??"
I read this article and was surprised when I reached the end because the whole thing felt like it was setting the stage for some announcement or new thing. But nothing came..? Forgive me if I'm being thick but what was the takeaway?
"A crummy ad??"
I read this article and was surprised when I reached the end because the whole thing felt like it was setting the stage for some announcement or new thing. But nothing came..? Forgive me if I'm being thick but what was the takeaway?
Agree. I was waiting for the other foot to drop and then..."email's not going away." Genuinely curious. Why is it posted and being upvoted here?
I read this article and was surprised when I reached the end because the whole thing felt like it was setting the stage for some announcement or new thing. But nothing came..? Forgive me if I'm being thick but what was the takeaway?
As a fastmail user I'm glad there was no announcement. Every time a company starts telling me about some bright future, this usually means my user experience is about to sink.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like per recipient emails, but I worried how I would know I authorized that sender to send to lonely chicken. The original site could have been compromised. That's why I bought my email domain and use @hnrobert42.com. It helps to use a password manager. I get a lot of convincing emails to linkedin@hnrobert42.com. As well as zynga, wework, etc.
I use +, so username+domainname@email-vendor.com Which is in the RFC, but yet the sheer amount of times I sign up for something. Like a bank, or a financial firm, get the confirmation e-mail, and then click "Verify your address" And get HTTP500 as their SQL has kicked up a stink
It's insane that in 2026 signing and encryption of emails still isn't the norm, but as long as the business model of the largest email vendors rely on us not having it, I guess we never will.
> In early 2024, Google and Yahoo began requiring Here's a big part of the problem right there. Google requires something, it becomes a requirement. In fact, Google's hold on email is a problem in itself. Among other things we need variety. Without it, "Google begins requiring" will be a recurring theme. It's happening again now with mobile phone apps! "Google begins requiring" that you register with them so that the…
I was an email admin for a university. In the past - each college ran their own email. Before DKIM, before SPF, you'd just have basically random servers on the internet sending email as (school).edu. Tons of random subdomains too. math.(school).edu and so on.
Email was eventually centralized but you'd have parts of the university still running their own things. Insisting they're special and can't be brought into the fold.
So, we had a lot of stuff out there just not passing authentication. A lot of spammers could just impersonate our domain.
We'd go to leadership and say "hey we should really get our act together" - but everything was working. Our emails were still getting out. Hard to justify spending the time, getting various higher-ups within departments to give up their things, and so on.
Unless you can get like, the president to back your initiative- universities are very decentralized and it becomes an issue of "do we have the political capital to spend here." The overall relationship between central IT and the various college-based IT departments was terrible, often bordering on combative.
Google and Yahoo made it so we could go to leadership and say "people will not get our emails if we don't get this straightened out" and it became a priority. When I left our DMARC reports were showing something like a 99% pass rate when it was previously like, 50.
So, I'm glad Google and Yahoo made that call, it gave us the kick in the pants we needed to get our own shit together. I am 100% certain we were not the only org like this.
Plus for a small host - where you're just running a single mail server or something - you just need a few things to pass DMARC.
A DMARC record, and an SPF record, and for your emails to pass SPF. You technically don't need to do DKIM signing (though I'd still recommend it because that survives automated forwarding).
I read this article and was surprised when I reached the end because the whole thing felt like it was setting the stage for some announcement or new thing. But nothing came..? Forgive me if I'm being thick but what was the takeaway?
As a fastmail user I'm glad there was no announcement. Every time a company starts telling me about some bright future, this usually means my user experience is about to sink.
time and time again it's worth stressing how the Lindy effect directly applies here to email or other layers of the protocol stack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a fastmail user I'm glad there was no announcement. Every time a company starts telling me about some bright future, this usually means my user experience is about to sink.
But there is an announcement, called "The Future of Email", which is a clickbait title that would be much better titled with the last header of the last paragraph: "Email is not going anywhere".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSON_Meta_Application_Protocol