4 ms·

Perhaps the additional user trust is worth it? But the other cost is searchability, which is a pain for a search-based email system. I don't think many people

Perhaps the additional user trust is worth it? But the other cost is searchability, which is a pain for a search-based email system. I don't think many people use labels very much.

avz 12y ago
Considerable value of the search functionality can be retained by restricting it to metadata like originator which needs to be accessible for delivery to work anyway.
- lallysingh 12y ago
  I completely agree. I'm curious on what's lost on the tail, however. Then again, I don't find many things that way, anyways.
- comex 12y ago
  For me at least, this would be completely unacceptable as a search replacement, as I frequently search old message bodies. Not to mention that there's no reason originator can't be encrypted at rest, at least in theory.. However, based on the experience of desktop search, I think pure client side search would probably have reasonable initialization time and space overhead, and would certainly make searches faster, at least compared to my current Gmail experience.
  - Animats 12y ago
    For me at least, this would be completely unacceptable as a search replacement, as I frequently search old message bodies. ... However, based on the experience of desktop search, I think pure client side search would probably have reasonable initialization time and space overhead, and would certainly make searches faster, at least compared to my current Gmail experience. Just install Mozilla Thunderbird and use IMAP. Client side search, all your devices sync via IMAP, no ads, and free software.
    - comex 12y ago
      FWIW, I've evaluated email clients from time to time, but haven't found anything I like enough to replace Gmail. I haven't tried Thunderbird for years because I don't want to use a client without conversation view, and Thunderbird doesn't seem to offer it as a core feature; I could try one of the extensions for it, but I'm suspicious it won't work well. Also, I'm not sure I want to start using a product that's been on life support for two years. However, I admit these are relatively small turnoffs, so perhaps I should give Thunderbird a spin some time... Anyway, it's off topic.
      - jesrui 12y ago
        > I don't want to use a client without conversation view, and Thunderbird doesn't seem to offer it as a core feature Actually it does, sort of: Right click on you@example.com, choose Search Messages, then Save as Search Folder, then "Match all Messages" and, in "Select the folders to search", Inbox and Sent.
quonn 12y ago
Probably. They make most of their money on Google search anyway - and with just the queries, no personal context as far as I know. No privacy issues arise here, in fact, it would probably work in incognito mode just as well. Are there any numbers on how much profit they actually make on Google Mail?
cromwellian 12y ago
Not just searchability, auto-categorization, and anti-spam as well. I would view it through the lens of putting the power of choice in the hands of the user. It allows people to make the choice of whether they value privacy more than usability, or, it allows fine-grained control -- end-to-end for messages you care to keep private, but no encryption for the mails you don't care about, but want searchability (mailing lists, notification emails, package tracking, etc)
- lallysingh 12y ago
  Indeed. I hadn't thought of spammers looking up your public key somewhere and sending you an encrypted email with it.
  - x1798DE 12y ago
    You could always use white-listing for encrypted e-mails - refuse all encrypted e-mail not from people on your contacts list or people whose keys you've signed, etc.

Perhaps the additional user trust is worth it? But the other cost is searchability, which is a pain for a search-based email system. I don't think many people use labels very much.

avz 12y ago

Considerable value of the search functionality can be retained by restricting it to metadata like originator which needs to be accessible for delivery to work anyway.

lallysingh 12y ago
I completely agree. I'm curious on what's lost on the tail, however. Then again, I don't find many things that way, anyways.
comex 12y ago
For me at least, this would be completely unacceptable as a search replacement, as I frequently search old message bodies. Not to mention that there's no reason originator can't be encrypted at rest, at least in theory.. However, based on the experience of desktop search, I think pure client side search would probably have reasonable initialization time and space overhead, and would certainly make searches faster, at least compared to my current Gmail experience.
- Animats 12y ago
  For me at least, this would be completely unacceptable as a search replacement, as I frequently search old message bodies. ... However, based on the experience of desktop search, I think pure client side search would probably have reasonable initialization time and space overhead, and would certainly make searches faster, at least compared to my current Gmail experience. Just install Mozilla Thunderbird and use IMAP. Client side search, all your devices sync via IMAP, no ads, and free software.
  - comex 12y ago
    FWIW, I've evaluated email clients from time to time, but haven't found anything I like enough to replace Gmail. I haven't tried Thunderbird for years because I don't want to use a client without conversation view, and Thunderbird doesn't seem to offer it as a core feature; I could try one of the extensions for it, but I'm suspicious it won't work well. Also, I'm not sure I want to start using a product that's been on life support for two years. However, I admit these are relatively small turnoffs, so perhaps I should give Thunderbird a spin some time... Anyway, it's off topic.
    - jesrui 12y ago
      > I don't want to use a client without conversation view, and Thunderbird doesn't seem to offer it as a core feature Actually it does, sort of: Right click on you@example.com, choose Search Messages, then Save as Search Folder, then "Match all Messages" and, in "Select the folders to search", Inbox and Sent.

quonn 12y ago

Probably. They make most of their money on Google search anyway - and with just the queries, no personal context as far as I know. No privacy issues arise here, in fact, it would probably work in incognito mode just as well. Are there any numbers on how much profit they actually make on Google Mail?

cromwellian 12y ago

Not just searchability, auto-categorization, and anti-spam as well. I would view it through the lens of putting the power of choice in the hands of the user. It allows people to make the choice of whether they value privacy more than usability, or, it allows fine-grained control -- end-to-end for messages you care to keep private, but no encryption for the mails you don't care about, but want searchability (mailing lists, notification emails, package tracking, etc)

lallysingh 12y ago
Indeed. I hadn't thought of spammers looking up your public key somewhere and sending you an encrypted email with it.
- x1798DE 12y ago
  You could always use white-listing for encrypted e-mails - refuse all encrypted e-mail not from people on your contacts list or people whose keys you've signed, etc.