Gregory's ServerIn all respects, fedi is indeed like email.
I also run my own email for that long and it more or less works. I can control what I receive but obviously I can't control inboxing of what I send. So I use other channels to initiate contact and get whitelisted. In short, I create my own network first and then use email on it.
Email is not free and *never has been*. It is a complicated to run service and people doing it should be paid. Good luck getting john doe to understand that.
The era of open/free email marketing and transactional email is coming to a dead-end. Even small providers now junk such mails. Users will have to do *something* to get transactional emails they want: whitelist the service or sign up with a pre-associated/accredited provider. Right now, only "big-enough" senders can get proper cold delivery. Nobody will block twitter or booking.com.
Although a touch overdramatic, most of the post is true. However, the suggestions are iffy. I won't go into details but as long as a provider has millions of users, it will be impossible to properly implement antispam without breaking the underlying model. Consider filtering mail for billions of users in a single system. It's a problem with its own gravitational well.
The only solution is to refederate email: place a limit on the number of users a single email system can have, forcefully re-distribute users. That will not happen without imposing authoritarian control over email, thus, again destroying it more.
I also run my own email for that long and it more or less works. I can control what I receive but obviously I can't control inboxing of what I send. So I use other channels to initiate contact and get whitelisted. In short, I create my own network first and then use email on it.
Email is not free and *never has been*. It is a complicated to run service and people doing it should be paid. Good luck getting john doe to understand that.
The era of open/free email marketing and transactional email is coming to a dead-end. Even small providers now junk such mails. Users will have to do *something* to get transactional emails they want: whitelist the service or sign up with a pre-associated/accredited provider. Right now, only "big-enough" senders can get proper cold delivery. Nobody will block twitter or booking.com.
Although a touch overdramatic, most of the post is true. However, the suggestions are iffy. I won't go into details but as long as a provider has millions of users, it will be impossible to properly implement antispam without breaking the underlying model. Consider filtering mail for billions of users in a single system. It's a problem with its own gravitational well.
The only solution is to refederate email: place a limit on the number of users a single email system can have, forcefully re-distribute users. That will not happen without imposing authoritarian control over email, thus, again destroying it more.