The blog post argues against interactive emails, specifically targeting AMP for Email. It contends that email's simplicity and plain text accessibility are its strengths, while interactivity introduces complexity, security risks, and accessibility issues. AMP, despite promising dynamic content, ultimately failed to gain traction because it bloated email size, created rendering inconsistencies across clients, demanded extra development effort, and ultimately provided little benefit over well-designed traditional HTML emails with clear calls to action leading to external web pages. Email's purpose, the author asserts, is to deliver concise information and entice clicks to richer online experiences, not to replicate those experiences within the inbox itself.
Notion has launched Notion Mail, an email client integrated directly into its workspace platform. It aims to streamline communication and project management by connecting emails to Notion pages, databases, and workflows. Key features include customizable inboxes with filters and sorting, the ability to convert emails into Notion tasks, and a built-in AI assistant called Notion AI for summarizing threads, composing replies, and translating messages. Notion Mail is currently in beta and available via a waitlist. It's designed to help users manage email within their existing Notion workflow, reducing context switching and improving productivity.
Hacker News users reacted to Notion Mail with skepticism and cautious curiosity. Several commenters questioned the value proposition, especially given the existing robust email clients and Notion's already broad feature set. Some worried about vendor lock-in and the potential for Notion to become bloated. Others expressed interest in specific features like the integrated task management and the potential for improved collaboration within teams already using Notion. A few users pointed out the limited availability (invite-only) and the potential for pricing concerns down the line. There was also discussion comparing Notion Mail to Superhuman and other email clients focusing on productivity and organization. Overall, the sentiment leaned towards a "wait-and-see" approach, with many wanting to observe real-world usage and reviews before considering a switch.
IMAP (Internet Message Access Protocol) allows multiple clients to access and manage email stored on a server. Instead of downloading messages like POP3, IMAP synchronizes the client's view with the server's mailbox state. Clients issue commands to interact with messages on the server – reading, deleting, moving, etc. – and the server responds with status updates and data. This enables access to the same mailbox from various devices while maintaining consistency. IMAP uses a folder structure on the server, mirroring this on the client, and supports flags for marking messages as read, answered, deleted, etc., all managed server-side. Connections are typically kept open for continuous synchronization and responsiveness.
Hacker News users discussed various aspects of IMAP, focusing on its complexity and alternatives. Some praised the article for clearly explaining a convoluted protocol, while others shared personal experiences and frustrations with IMAP's quirks, such as inconsistent behavior across servers. A few commenters suggested exploring simpler email protocols like POP3 for basic use cases or diving deeper into specific IMAP features. The discussion also touched on email clients, synchronization challenges, and the benefits of storing emails locally. Several users recommended Dovecot as a robust IMAP server implementation.
Delta Chat is a free and open-source messaging app that leverages existing email infrastructure for communication. Instead of relying on centralized servers, messages are sent and received as encrypted emails, ensuring end-to-end encryption through automatic PGP key management. This means users can communicate securely using their existing email addresses and providers, without needing to create new accounts or convince contacts to join a specific platform. Delta Chat offers a familiar chat interface with features like group chats, file sharing, and voice messages, all while maintaining the decentralized and private nature of email communication. Essentially, it transforms email into a modern messaging experience without compromising user control or security.
Hacker News commenters generally expressed interest in Delta Chat's approach to secure messaging by leveraging existing email infrastructure. Some praised its simplicity and ease of use, particularly for non-technical users, highlighting the lack of needing to manage separate accounts or convince contacts to join a new platform. Several users discussed potential downsides, including metadata leakage inherent in the email protocol and the potential for spam. The reliance on Autocrypt for key exchange was also a point of discussion, with some expressing concerns about its discoverability and broader adoption. A few commenters mentioned alternative projects with similar aims, like Briar and Status. Overall, the sentiment leaned towards cautious optimism, acknowledging Delta Chat's unique advantages while recognizing the challenges of building a secure messaging system on top of email.
The Hacker News post showcases an AI-powered voice agent designed to manage Gmail. This agent, accessed through a dedicated web interface, allows users to interact with their inbox conversationally, using voice commands to perform actions like reading emails, composing replies, archiving, and searching. The goal is to provide a hands-free, more efficient way to handle email, particularly beneficial for multitasking or accessibility.
Hacker News users generally expressed skepticism and concerns about privacy regarding the AI voice agent for Gmail. Several commenters questioned the value proposition, wondering why voice control would be preferable to existing keyboard shortcuts and features within Gmail. The potential for errors and the need for precise language when dealing with email were also highlighted as drawbacks. Some users expressed discomfort with granting access to their email data, and the closed-source nature of the project further amplified these privacy worries. The lack of a clear explanation of the underlying AI technology also drew criticism. There was some interest in the technical implementation, but overall, the reception was cautious, with many commenters viewing the project as potentially more trouble than it's worth.
Imapsync is a command-line tool designed for synchronizing or migrating email accounts between IMAP servers. It supports a wide range of scenarios, including one-way and two-way synchronization, transferring emails between different providers, migrating to a new server, and creating backups. Imapsync offers features like folder filtering, bandwidth control, SSL/TLS encryption, and the ability to resume interrupted transfers. It prioritizes data safety and accuracy, employing techniques like dry runs to preview changes and MD5 checksum comparisons to verify message integrity. While primarily aimed at advanced users comfortable with command-line interfaces, its documentation provides detailed instructions and examples.
Hacker News users discuss imapsync's utility for migrating email, highlighting its speed and effectiveness, particularly with large mailboxes. Some users praise its ability to handle complex migrations across different providers, while others caution about potential issues like duplicate emails if not used carefully. Several commenters suggest alternative tools like OfflineIMAP, isync, and mbsync, comparing their features and ease of use to imapsync. A few users also share their experiences using imapsync for specific migration scenarios, offering practical tips and workarounds for common challenges.
Tired of missing important emails hidden by overly complex filters, Cory Doctorow deactivated all his email filtering. He now processes everything manually, relying on search and a "processed" tag for organization. This shift, though initially time-consuming, allows him to maintain better awareness of his inbox contents and engage more thoughtfully with his correspondence, ultimately reducing stress and improving his overall email experience. He believes filters fostered a false sense of control and led to overlooked messages.
HN commenters largely agree with the author's premise that email filters create more work than they save. Several share their own experiences of abandoning filtering, citing increased focus and reduced email anxiety. Some suggest alternative strategies like using multiple inboxes or prioritizing newsletters to specific days. A few dissenting voices argue that filters are useful for specific situations, like separating work and personal email or managing high volumes of mailing list traffic. One commenter notes the irony of using a "Focus Inbox" feature, essentially a built-in filter, while advocating against custom filters. Others point out that the efficacy of filtering depends heavily on individual email volume and work style.
Elwood Edwards, the voice of the iconic "You've got mail!" AOL notification, is offering personalized voice recordings through Cameo. He records greetings, announcements, and other custom messages, providing a nostalgic touch for fans of the classic internet sound. This allows individuals and businesses to incorporate the familiar and beloved voice into various projects or simply have a personalized message from a piece of internet history.
HN commenters were generally impressed with the technical achievement of Elwood's personalized voice recordings using Edwards' voice. Several pointed out the potential for misuse, particularly in scams and phishing attempts, with some suggesting watermarking or other methods to verify authenticity. The legal and ethical implications of using someone's voice, even with their permission, were also raised, especially regarding future deepfakes and potential damage to reputation. Others discussed the nostalgia factor and potential applications like personalized audiobooks or interactive fiction. There was a small thread about the technical details of the voice cloning process and its limitations, and a few comments recalling Edwards' previous work. Some commenters were more skeptical, viewing it as a clever but ultimately limited gimmick.
Summary of Comments ( 44 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43725865
HN commenters generally agree that AMP for email was a bad idea. Several pointed out the privacy implications of allowing arbitrary JavaScript execution within emails, potentially exposing sensitive information to third parties. Others criticized the added complexity for both email developers and users, with little demonstrable benefit. Some suggested that AMP's failure stemmed from a misunderstanding of email's core function, which is primarily asynchronous communication, not interactive web pages. The lack of widespread adoption and the subsequent deprecation by Google were seen as validation of these criticisms. A few commenters expressed mild disappointment, suggesting some potential benefits like real-time updates, but ultimately acknowledged the security and usability concerns outweighed the advantages. Several comments also lamented the general trend of "over-engineering" email, moving away from its simple and robust text-based roots.
The Hacker News post titled "AMP and why emails are not (and should never be) interactive" has generated a significant discussion with numerous comments. Many of the comments express strong opposition to AMP for email, echoing the sentiment of the original blog post.
Several commenters focus on the privacy implications of AMP, arguing that it allows Google to track user interactions within emails, providing them with even more data. This is seen as a significant downside, especially considering the potential for abuse and the general lack of trust in Google's data handling practices. One commenter specifically mentions that allowing dynamic content in emails would make phishing attacks significantly easier to execute, making it harder for users to distinguish between legitimate and malicious emails.
Another recurring theme is the added complexity for both email developers and users. Developers would need to learn and implement AMP, increasing development costs and potentially leading to inconsistencies across email clients. For users, the interactive elements could be confusing or even annoying, particularly for those who prefer the simplicity of traditional email. One commenter notes the irony of Google pushing for more complexity in email while simultaneously promoting the minimalist "Inbox Zero" philosophy.
Some commenters also question the actual benefits of AMP for email, arguing that the proposed interactive features, such as completing surveys or browsing product catalogs directly within emails, are not particularly compelling and could be easily achieved through traditional links to external websites. The added complexity and privacy concerns are seen as outweighing any potential benefits.
There is also discussion about the control Google would gain over email communication with AMP. Commenters express concern that Google could potentially manipulate the functionality of AMP, favoring their own services or even censoring certain types of content within emails. This control is seen as a threat to the open nature of email communication.
Finally, several commenters express skepticism about Google's motivations for pushing AMP for email, suggesting that it's primarily driven by their desire to collect more data and further integrate their services into users' lives. They see AMP as another attempt by Google to exert more control over the internet, rather than a genuine effort to improve the email experience. The ultimate failure of AMP is highlighted by multiple commenters, bolstering the arguments against its implementation in email.