Re: [9fans] pathetic

[David Presotto <presotto@closedmind.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1712 bytes --]

So just take it to its logical connclusion and
make it a pull protocol.  You get a note with a URL
and grab it at your leasure.  This is exactly what MMS
(cell phones that send/rcv pictures) do for reception.  The
message is kept on a server that other phones can pick it
up from.  The notification is sent to the phone via
a short message. Only if sent as email is it wrapped up
as a MIME email containing SMIL instructions, html
text, and jpg pictures.

We could do the same for email, sending a pick up URL,
and some 'secret' for decoding the message or logging
on or whatever.  If you broadcast (like mailing lists)
only the notification goes out.  AOL/Yahoo/etc mail
relays turn into web repositories.  Your mailbox server
can still yank some stuff automagicly if you like the
identity of the sender.  Use TLS on all connections,
if the web can do it, so can email.  Slowing things
down isn't that bad.

It changes the nature of spam somewhat, i.e., it would
become a short message containing nothing but a URL and
a subject.  Oops, that's what most of my spam already is
but at least it means they can't fire and forget, they have
to leave servers up.

And we're now reduced to a previously unsolved problem
with the same solutions.  If we're unwilling to accept
any solution that identifies the sender more than
trusting the From: we're still stuck with our Bayesian
filters etc.  If we're willing to put up with some
caller id, then we have to live with a public key
infrastructure, SPF, or something similar.  I personally
like public keys, just not the infrastructure.  If
someone has introduced themselves to me once and left
a public key, that's good enough for me.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3000 bytes --]

From: Geoff Collyer <geoff@collyer.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] pathetic
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:52:15 -0800
Message-ID: <139eb44874bee2237034401996735c24@collyer.net>

Just getting most systems to strongly encourage TLS under SMTP would
impose a CPU tax on bulk mailers, though I don't know if it would be
high enough to really slow them down.

Yeah, caller-id for mail: when we find those weasels, oooh, we're
gonna moidalize 'em!  Not.  The NSA has bin Laden's phone number but
they still haven't caught him.

Our current model of e-mail is a dump truck pulling up to your front
door and pouring unfiltered, unsorted mail through your mail slot, in
a vast heap all over your floor, scaring your cats.  I think it would
be improved by moving to a model more like someone knocking at your
door and trying to persuade your butler to let him (the stranger) talk
to you.  If the butler knows the person at the door, he might let him
in, or might toss him out and bar the door.  If the butler doesn't
know the person, he might take the person's calling card, leaving you
to decide if you want to establish contact.  Over time, the butler
comes to know which people you want let through and which you want him
to call the police to remove / shoot / disappear.  Instead of one
trying to drink from a fire-hose (or cement chute!), each message
would result in a negotiation (perhaps very brief!), which is a more
orderly process, the rate of which can be controlled.