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

It is time to ban email

shkspr.mobi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 64 posts

Re: It is time to ban email

#51

Post by johnea »

We'd be way better off banning the asocial media corporate platforms.

Or maybe, just ban bull shit blag posts like this one?

Another advantage of email that the author doesn't mention is the ability to host one's own email. For actual persons and corporate entities.

Of course this would also be so uncool for the hip kids. All we _really_ need are 15 sec videos highlighting the twerk tik "set your balls on fire challenge".

It's funny, right?

Just another example of why I'm so grateful to not have grown up in the internet brain damage era...

The consequences are, sadly, irreversible. The individuals with this condition will likely never recover. It's like starting to give kids cigarettes at age 5, and then expect them to quit on their own in their 20s and 30s. Just not gonna happen. The only hope is for the new generations to have some kids and raise them differently.

Re: It is time to ban email

#53

Post by imiric »

edent wrote: post #38
imiric wrote: post #29

> When was the last time you used carbon paper to make a copy? Have you ever dictated to your secretary who a memorandum should be blind-copied to? When was the last time you filed a document in a physical folder? Or used a physical clipboard? Have you ever found a physical bug in your computer? These are all concepts that were once common in the real world, adopted to make computing more familiar and approachable. W…

Most new students don't understand filesystems. https://www.theverge.com/22684730/students-file-folder-direc... A directory structure is a skeuomorph which doesn't fit in with their search-first workflow. I've not seen any articles about the clipboard - but I have watched people of all ages copy-type rather than copy 'n' paste. The technologies you rely on don't match the mental model of most new computer users.

> Most new students don't understand filesystems.

That's not because the file/folder analogies are wrong or outdated, but because they don't use filesystems directly.

My point is that it doesn't matter whether these concepts are used in the real world or not; they're just names. People don't understand the difference between the internet and the web, or why the program they use to access a web site is called a "browser", or even what a web "site" is, etc. Sometimes it's not possible to describe a digital concept using analogous terms from the real world, and that's OK.

What's wrong is dismissing a technology based on the terms it uses, as TFA does.

Re: It is time to ban email

#54

Post by johnea »

robrtsql wrote: post #7

The problems described here seem like they could be solved by email clients, rather than abandoning the whole protocol.

I agree with this.

It's a client UI and server configuration issue.

Email clients and servers could be configured to support instantaneous transmission, with a client UI that is presented in a thread like format (no, I'm not talking about thunderbird "threads", that's just mozilla wasting more of goggle's money).

This really _should_ replace SMS even before messaging apps. SMS is a seriously bad service-provider-dominated security nightmare.

Re: It is time to ban email

#55

Post by wrs »

Spivak wrote: post #32
TZubiri wrote: post #18

And replace it with.... Email is a neutral protocol, in a natural monopoly, very hard to replace unless you want to choose a state sanctioned monopoly like you would to Facebook's Whatsapp or Apple's messenger. This sounds like fatalistic throwing the baby with the bath water, I know that there's a fine line between operator's error and bad system design, but when a piece of technology has been stable for 40 years, a…

You replace it with literally any chat application made in the last 30 years. Hell even Microsoft Lync didn't have this problem. You don't even have to replace the email system behind the curtain, just make it work like group chats. People seem to get "start a group chat" vs "send a message to each person individually." Why we even still bother with the letters and mailboxes metaphor is beyond me. It implies a level…

I was on a team looking at real life communication behaviors in 2000 or so, when email was pretty new to “normal” folks. We learned it was very common for people on their home computers communicating with family to just reply-all to the most recent message to the family. This meant the subject line was somewhere between useless and actively confusing, so they ignored it.

What they really wanted (without knowing how to ask for it) was a multi-party chat application, but one with attachments and universal addressing — which in 2025 we still don’t have, thanks to rent-seeking. Fortunately, email was defined before anyone realized how much money you could make by maintaining a walled garden.

Re: It is time to ban email

#56

Post by drivingmenuts »

edent wrote: post #22
TZubiri wrote: post #18

And replace it with.... Email is a neutral protocol, in a natural monopoly, very hard to replace unless you want to choose a state sanctioned monopoly like you would to Facebook's Whatsapp or Apple's messenger. This sounds like fatalistic throwing the baby with the bath water, I know that there's a fine line between operator's error and bad system design, but when a piece of technology has been stable for 40 years, a…

> when a piece of technology has been stable for 40 years, and there is a fuck up, you can't reaally blame it on the tech. After 40 years of the same fuck up - what should you blame?

People who don't learn how to use the tools that are an intrinsic part of their job?

Re: It is time to ban email

#57

Post by Spivak »

TZubiri wrote: post #43
Spivak wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You replace it with literally any chat application made in the last 30 years. Hell even Microsoft Lync didn't have this problem. You don't even have to replace the email system behind the curtain, just make it work like group chats. People seem to get "start a group chat" vs "send a message to each person individually." Why we even still bother with the letters and mailboxes metaphor is beyond me. It implies a level…

>"Why we even still bother with the letters and mailboxes metaphor is beyond me" Well for one it enables us to apply a whole lot of law and case law without reinventing the wheel. Mail contents enjoy a lot of privacy privileges, while headers do not as they are used for routing purposes. >Just send the file, what does "attaching" Ah yes just send the file, how didn't we think of this sooner, you must publish your fin…

No need to be snarky, this is a UI issue. In any chat application you open the chat with your desired recipient(s) and send the file. And it works, you don't have to write a message and then attach the file to it. You also don't have to think about the difference between attaching an image and having an image in the message. It's unnecessary ceremony on the part of the user, you would never invent it again.

Re: It is time to ban email

#58

Post by weikju »

drivingmenuts wrote: post #56
edent wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when a piece of technology has been stable for 40 years, and there is a fuck up, you can't reaally blame it on the tech. After 40 years of the same fuck up - what should you blame?

People who don't learn how to use the tools that are an intrinsic part of their job?

> People who don't learn how to use the tools that are an intrinsic part of their job?

EXACTLY! The amount of times I run into people who aren't willing to even put 1 iota of effort into learning tools they use daily... astounds me.

Re: It is time to ban email

#59

Post by TZubiri »

Spivak wrote: post #57
TZubiri wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Why we even still bother with the letters and mailboxes metaphor is beyond me" Well for one it enables us to apply a whole lot of law and case law without reinventing the wheel. Mail contents enjoy a lot of privacy privileges, while headers do not as they are used for routing purposes. >Just send the file, what does "attaching" Ah yes just send the file, how didn't we think of this sooner, you must publish your fin…

No need to be snarky, this is a UI issue. In any chat application you open the chat with your desired recipient(s) and send the file. And it works, you don't have to write a message and then attach the file to it. You also don't have to think about the difference between attaching an image and having an image in the message. It's unnecessary ceremony on the part of the user, you would never invent it again.

But you can send an empty message and attach a file. Not sure what the issue is.

On a more general note, email is a standardized protocol and originates from the network, while standards do sometimes define interface requirements, it's for sure sparse.

Also most software tends to implement standards comprehensively and unimaginatively, so I agree that email UI is an issue.

Re: It is time to ban email

#60

Post by xigoi »

robrtsql wrote: post #7

The problems described here seem like they could be solved by email clients, rather than abandoning the whole protocol.

Definitely. IIRC, GNU Evolution gives you a stern warning if you try to send a message with many To or Cc recipients.
Post reply on HN