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

EmailTriager

emailtriager.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 127 posts

Re: EmailTriager

#91

Post by gajus »

marssaxman wrote: post #79
gajus wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That view that you are describing is completely culture dependent though. The opposite is true in Asia.

I've never heard of that before. Could you describe how it works?

A search of "voice messaging culture in asia" surfaces quite a few articles on the subject. But the gist is that vast majority of your every day communication with someone is going to be an exchange of short voice messages rather than text messages, both in work and personal context. This includes planning to meet someone, ordering food, "catching up", discussing a meeting, etc.

Receiving a long text would not be necessarily rude, but unusual.

Re: EmailTriager

#92

Post by gajus »

frereubu wrote: post #83
gajus wrote: post #8

My problem with this is that it contributes to the broken culture of email. – Wanna go for coffee? – January is busy. After? is a completely fine exchange. Adding a wall of text to convey the same information does not help anyone.

I'm old enough to remember when tech folk would tut when someone had a long plaintext signature because it took up bandwidth...

Don't think I remember that. No one counted bytes when sending messages. In what context would it have mattered?

Re: EmailTriager

#93

Post by kkyangyang »

velox_neb wrote: post #52

Rather than a GPT-3 generated email, I would rather receive the prompt that the sender would have used to generate the email. We could even come up with a conventional shorthand for this. Imagine you send me a message that just says [[personalized thank you note for the pair of socks you got me for christmas]]. Then I just imagine a long GPT-3 generated message in its place. And I reply with [[gracious acknowledgment…

will consider adding this :)

Re: EmailTriager

#94

Post by fancymcpoopoo »

gajus wrote: post #8

My problem with this is that it contributes to the broken culture of email. – Wanna go for coffee? – January is busy. After? is a completely fine exchange. Adding a wall of text to convey the same information does not help anyone.

You can’t find any time in a while month to get a coffee… that’s not fine at all

Re: EmailTriager

#95

Post by kkyangyang »

gajus wrote: post #8

My problem with this is that it contributes to the broken culture of email. – Wanna go for coffee? – January is busy. After? is a completely fine exchange. Adding a wall of text to convey the same information does not help anyone.

what are your thoughts on x.ai from years ago

Re: EmailTriager

#96

Post by stonogo »

gajus wrote: post #92
frereubu wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm old enough to remember when tech folk would tut when someone had a long plaintext signature because it took up bandwidth...

Don't think I remember that. No one counted bytes when sending messages. In what context would it have mattered?

It wasn't about bandwidth, but long signatures were obnoxious beacuse you had to see them multiple times per day. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/McQuary_limit

People whined about bandwidth waste in this category of complaints but I think it wasn't a real problem, just another aspect of an already-disliked long-signature practice: https://books.google.com/books?id=qoc5DQAAQBAJ&pg=PA97#v=one...

Re: EmailTriager

#97

Post by gajus »

kkyangyang wrote: post #95
gajus wrote: post #8

My problem with this is that it contributes to the broken culture of email. – Wanna go for coffee? – January is busy. After? is a completely fine exchange. Adding a wall of text to convey the same information does not help anyone.

what are your thoughts on x.ai from years ago

Apart from the fact that it wasn't AI, but a human labor performing tasks pretending to be AI, it was a great service.

Re: EmailTriager

#98

Post by kkyangyang »

nojs wrote: post #15
harshaw wrote: post #11

Kind of would like "train gmail on all of my sent emails and generate replies in my own sarcastic / self deprecating style". If the request is from a certain family member make sure you reply with an appropriate level of delay to know that they are not your top priority. Inject an occasional reply with an uncharacteristic amount of emotion and sensitivity to show that you aren't completely robotic and devoid of human…

Sounds a lot like Black Mirror. You could even keep it turned on after you die!

thats the plan!

Re: EmailTriager

#99

Post by gajus »

stonogo wrote: post #96
gajus wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't think I remember that. No one counted bytes when sending messages. In what context would it have mattered?

It wasn't about bandwidth, but long signatures were obnoxious beacuse you had to see them multiple times per day. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/McQuary_limit People whined about bandwidth waste in this category of complaints but I think it wasn't a real problem, just another aspect of an already-disliked long-signature practice: https://books.google.com/books?id=qoc5DQAAQBAJ&pg=PA97#v=one...

Learned something new. Thanks

Re: EmailTriager

#100

Post by fragmede »

gajus wrote: post #43
monkeydust wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone remember google wave ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Wave ) - I remember playing around with it with a few friends thinking there is definatley something in it.

At the time, Wave felt revolutionary. Real shame it never got broader adoption.

What's a shame is that that they gave up on it. There was clearly a need for new tool in that space. Though, these days where we're at is a shared Google doc with commenting.
Post reply on HN