4 ms·

Cool project. If I understand, it learns what emails mean and what actions should be triggered across all users. So I guess it must store my emails and actions

by ar7hur 12y ago

Cool project. If I understand, it learns what emails mean and what actions should be triggered across all users. So I guess it must store my emails and actions somewhere, to participate to this across-the-board learning. I wonder if users will be concerned about this.

utkarsh_apoorva 12y ago
Good point. In fact, we are concerned about that quite a bit - so much so that we will soon be releasing details of how reconstructing somebody's email is close to impossible, even by the Quickly team. Basically, we are storing only patterns, not email content directly.
- alphapapa 12y ago
  You're expecting people to take your word for it. Even if you're telling the truth, when your security is compromised, so are all your users' email, because you have full access to it. Bottom line: Yet another "web 2.x", proprietary, "beta," SaaS, subscription, third-party, unrestricted-privacy-compromising tool without a business model that might be around for a few years before being bought and ruined or going bankrupt. One would have to be nuts to trust it and to build one's business processes around it. And why? Seriously, it could be done client-side without compromising account credentials or email privacy in a bit of Perl or Python, maybe a browser extension, and throw in some Bayesian analysis to reduce the need for manual templating and scraping. A few hours in Emacs/gnus/etc and no need to hand over ALL OF MY EMAIL to yet another "but we're only storing your patterns!" third-party web site. Someday people will wake up to the insanity and stop trusting these ephemeral convenience services. The question is, will it happen naturally, or will it take more massive security/privacy breaches before people stop being so lazy and nai...I mean, trusting?
  - utkarsh_apoorva 12y ago
    alphapapa, your points are indeed valid. And your alternative tech suggestions are quite close to what we are doing, while still protecting our code. Just hold on till we divulge more details :-)
  - rakoo 12y ago
    > Seriously, it could be done [...] in a bit of Perl or Python [...] A few hours [...] People said the same thing when dropbox was announced, look where we are now: very few people do it locally, and dropbox has won.
    - madospace 12y ago
      Thats so true rakoo,
    - alphapapa 12y ago
      Dropbox has won? Won what? Was there an International File Sync and Sharing Software Competition? How is that relevant to the issue of giving a third-party access to ALL OF YOUR EMAIL for the sake of convenience? How does that justify doing so rather than developing a client-side, FOSS solution?
      - tobylane 12y ago
        Justification doesn't win over ease of use or network effect. This is one implementation of a fairly broad idea, wait for the others to come.
      - rakoo 12y ago
        There was (and still is) a need for seamlessly storing one's documents in a secure safe, somewhere, where durability is guaranteed, and sync them between one's devices. Dropbox stepped in with a solution to this problem, and someone here on HN dismissed it with "it's just a glorified FTP". It turns out that Dropbox has set the standard for how to store files on the cloud and sync them for the masses. My gut tells me they're losing grounds to the GDrive/OneDrive/iCloud et al but it's still a default option for many people. In that sense, they have "won" this domain. Now, don't mistake me: Dropbox and the likes have created a huge problem with data privacy. But as FOSS developers, we must not think that somehow Dropbox doesn't exist or doesn't solve a problem; if we want a better, FOSS alternative, we must set the bar at least as high, and not blind ourselves.

by ar7hur 12y ago

utkarsh_apoorva 12y ago

Good point. In fact, we are concerned about that quite a bit - so much so that we will soon be releasing details of how reconstructing somebody's email is close to impossible, even by the Quickly team. Basically, we are storing only patterns, not email content directly.

alphapapa 12y ago
You're expecting people to take your word for it. Even if you're telling the truth, when your security is compromised, so are all your users' email, because you have full access to it. Bottom line: Yet another "web 2.x", proprietary, "beta," SaaS, subscription, third-party, unrestricted-privacy-compromising tool without a business model that might be around for a few years before being bought and ruined or going bankrupt. One would have to be nuts to trust it and to build one's business processes around it. And why? Seriously, it could be done client-side without compromising account credentials or email privacy in a bit of Perl or Python, maybe a browser extension, and throw in some Bayesian analysis to reduce the need for manual templating and scraping. A few hours in Emacs/gnus/etc and no need to hand over ALL OF MY EMAIL to yet another "but we're only storing your patterns!" third-party web site. Someday people will wake up to the insanity and stop trusting these ephemeral convenience services. The question is, will it happen naturally, or will it take more massive security/privacy breaches before people stop being so lazy and nai...I mean, trusting?
- utkarsh_apoorva 12y ago
  alphapapa, your points are indeed valid. And your alternative tech suggestions are quite close to what we are doing, while still protecting our code. Just hold on till we divulge more details :-)
- rakoo 12y ago
  > Seriously, it could be done [...] in a bit of Perl or Python [...] A few hours [...] People said the same thing when dropbox was announced, look where we are now: very few people do it locally, and dropbox has won.
  - madospace 12y ago
    Thats so true rakoo,
  - alphapapa 12y ago
    Dropbox has won? Won what? Was there an International File Sync and Sharing Software Competition? How is that relevant to the issue of giving a third-party access to ALL OF YOUR EMAIL for the sake of convenience? How does that justify doing so rather than developing a client-side, FOSS solution?
    - tobylane 12y ago
      Justification doesn't win over ease of use or network effect. This is one implementation of a fairly broad idea, wait for the others to come.
    - rakoo 12y ago
      There was (and still is) a need for seamlessly storing one's documents in a secure safe, somewhere, where durability is guaranteed, and sync them between one's devices. Dropbox stepped in with a solution to this problem, and someone here on HN dismissed it with "it's just a glorified FTP". It turns out that Dropbox has set the standard for how to store files on the cloud and sync them for the masses. My gut tells me they're losing grounds to the GDrive/OneDrive/iCloud et al but it's still a default option for many people. In that sense, they have "won" this domain. Now, don't mistake me: Dropbox and the likes have created a huge problem with data privacy. But as FOSS developers, we must not think that somehow Dropbox doesn't exist or doesn't solve a problem; if we want a better, FOSS alternative, we must set the bar at least as high, and not blind ourselves.