3 ms·

Signal is nice, and I use it. But it's an instant messaging system. Email has different use cases. I think what we're going to need is a new, non-SMTP protocol

Signal is nice, and I use it. But it's an instant messaging system. Email has different use cases. I think what we're going to need is a new, non-SMTP protocol, which preserves all of the good things about email, while providing e2e encryption and (pseudonymous) identity assurance. I don't know enough to be involved in designing that protocol, though, other than saying what I want to see as an end-user.

psiconaut 10y ago
pond has interesting properties, I think the next generation mail will have to implement some of those ideas. and Signal/WhatsApp comes to replace (and kill) xmpp, not email. Another issue is the generational shift away from email, that is only for Spam and Work, more and more everytime...
- NoGravitas 10y ago
  Since Pond is hard to search for, [link attached][0]. [0]: https://github.com/agl/pond https://github.com/agl/pond
kkl 10y ago
What properties does email have that asynchronous messaging services (e.g. Signal) do not?
- ThatGeoGuy 10y ago
  Cross-platform (Chrome web-apps don't count), Federated, Distributed, to name a few. The reason email is so entrenched is probably because of these reasons entirely. Being able to send a message from any provider to any provider certainly helped spread adoption easily.
- NoGravitas 10y ago
  There are protocol properties, and client properties. I think some of both are important. ### Protocol * Easily federated * Identifiers can be memorable/meaningful (unlike phone numbers) while still being globally unique (thanks to federation) * Device independent (not tied to a phone number, can generally use the same account on different devices) * Can contact people you don't know/haven't met (this is possible with Signal, but they'd have to publicly share their personal cell phone number, which is a no-go). ### Client * Optimized for longer-form, less immediate messaging (folders, drafts, rich text) * MIME attachments (Signal supports only a limited number of predefined types of attachments) I feel like you could probably layer an email-equivalent on top of Matrix, but I'm not 100% sure about that.

psiconaut 10y ago

pond has interesting properties, I think the next generation mail will have to implement some of those ideas. and Signal/WhatsApp comes to replace (and kill) xmpp, not email. Another issue is the generational shift away from email, that is only for Spam and Work, more and more everytime...

NoGravitas 10y ago
Since Pond is hard to search for, [link attached][0]. [0]: https://github.com/agl/pond https://github.com/agl/pond

kkl 10y ago

What properties does email have that asynchronous messaging services (e.g. Signal) do not?

ThatGeoGuy 10y ago
Cross-platform (Chrome web-apps don't count), Federated, Distributed, to name a few. The reason email is so entrenched is probably because of these reasons entirely. Being able to send a message from any provider to any provider certainly helped spread adoption easily.
NoGravitas 10y ago
There are protocol properties, and client properties. I think some of both are important. ### Protocol * Easily federated * Identifiers can be memorable/meaningful (unlike phone numbers) while still being globally unique (thanks to federation) * Device independent (not tied to a phone number, can generally use the same account on different devices) * Can contact people you don't know/haven't met (this is possible with Signal, but they'd have to publicly share their personal cell phone number, which is a no-go). ### Client * Optimized for longer-form, less immediate messaging (folders, drafts, rich text) * MIME attachments (Signal supports only a limited number of predefined types of attachments) I feel like you could probably layer an email-equivalent on top of Matrix, but I'm not 100% sure about that.