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

The Future of Email

fastmail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–217 of 217 posts

Re: The Future of Email

#211

Post by vbezhenar »

zikduruqe wrote: post #86
vbezhenar wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is possible to have E2E encryption on emails. You can have E2E encryption on everything. Just use `age` and encrypt your message with sender public key. Easy.

> Easy vbezhenar, this is your grandmother. I just got an email from you with a bunch of gobbledygook and I can't read it. /s If it were that easy, everyone would be doing it.

> If it were that easy, everyone would be doing it.

E2E encryption is one click away in Telegram. I've yet to find anyone turn it on. Most people just do not care about encryption. The whole encryption story is pulled into mainstream by crypto-enthusiasts IMO.

Re: The Future of Email

#212

Post by port11 »

timwis wrote: post #113

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?

“The inbox of the future will be faster, smarter, and more capable than what most of us use today.”

There you go. They don’t know how to get there, but email’s getting faster and smarter and stuff.

Re: The Future of Email

#213

Post by itskokeh »

fooqux wrote: post #24
itskokeh wrote: post #9

Emails are very important especially at this age of rapidly changing technological landscape. It's important that they're secure. Is it possible to have E2E encryption on emails?

> Is it possible to have E2E encryption on emails? You literally have a proton email address on your profile.

I mean having it as a default. Big tech benefits from making emails unencrypted.

The question is, Can the encrypted mail be a default?

That can push email companies to make access to email a paid service. And that would cut out a huge chunk of world population from access to email.

It's a full chain reaction and that's why companies like Proton remain small

Re: The Future of Email

#214

Post by inigyou »

b112 wrote: post #207
inigyou wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might go to jail, you might make $1000. Crimes usually require criminal intent.

I spoke of licensing, for unrestricted internet access. No one will have unrestricted access otherwise. The criminal intent was giving somebody without a license, access to your gear to spoof you. If someone is too ignorant to not know what that means, then they would never acquire a license.

So no internet for 99% of people? Computer nerds only? You probably don't need any more restrictions with that standard in place. That was the early internet.

Re: The Future of Email

#215

Post by b112 »

inigyou wrote: post #214
b112 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I spoke of licensing, for unrestricted internet access. No one will have unrestricted access otherwise. The criminal intent was giving somebody without a license, access to your gear to spoof you. If someone is too ignorant to not know what that means, then they would never acquire a license.

So no internet for 99% of people? Computer nerds only? You probably don't need any more restrictions with that standard in place. That was the early internet.

No "unrestricted internet" for 99.9% (or even 99.99%) of people.

The massed will still be able to access youtube, google. They won't be able to open random ports without proxies, and yes that means even online gaming is going to be controlled.

Re: The Future of Email

#216

Post by laurex »

the_bear wrote: post #114
prepend wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow they mail letters with info. Encrypted email wouldn’t require a BAA.

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm currently working on getting my company HIPAA-compliant, so I know more than the average person about this. My understanding is that there's a thing called the "conduit exception" which basically says that if data is transiently passing through a channel and it's not being looked at, it's ok. But wherever the data lands must be HIPAA-compliant. This seems crazy to me, but that's how it works…

Could you do a p2p connection via browser that would still send the message to the person's "inbox"? I suppose not everyone even has an on-device mail client anymore though.

Re: The Future of Email

#217

Post by snowlynx »

jprjr_ wrote: post #167
einpoklum wrote: post #49

> 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…

Honestly requiring DMARC was overall a good thing. 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. Insis…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN