▲ -44 ▼ The Death of Decentralized Email (blog.lopp.net) submitted 2 years ago by makeasnek@lemmy.ml to c/fediverse@lemmy.world 6 comments fedilink hide all child comments Interesting history and analysis of SMTP's history. How can we prevent fedi and other open protocols from suffering the same fates?
[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 20 points 2 years ago (2 children) This isn't about email or centralization, it's a Bitcoin promo piece. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Thanks for the heads up permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kiernian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Aside from one (seemingly very out of place at the time) early mention that the author used Bitcoin, there was no hint of it being pro-bitcoin until the very, very end. I found it to be a very worthwhile article right up until that point and even slightly intriguing from an academic perspective after that point. I despise the endless blind parroting of the typical cryptobro refrains elsewhere on the Internet when crypto is brought up and I still liked the article, so I wouldn't write it off just because one guy with a cryptohammer inevitably sees the very real SMTP problem as a cryptonail in the end. It's natural when you have a "solution in search of a problem" situation like we do with crypto (and block chain, and for that matter SharePoint. People with knowledge of a thing often try to use it to solve problems it probably wasn't meant for.) permalink fedilink source parent [–] smeg@feddit.uk 7 points 2 years ago It is an interesting history of email though, it's only the final 10% that even mentions bitcoin. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Thanks for the heads up permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kiernian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Aside from one (seemingly very out of place at the time) early mention that the author used Bitcoin, there was no hint of it being pro-bitcoin until the very, very end. I found it to be a very worthwhile article right up until that point and even slightly intriguing from an academic perspective after that point. I despise the endless blind parroting of the typical cryptobro refrains elsewhere on the Internet when crypto is brought up and I still liked the article, so I wouldn't write it off just because one guy with a cryptohammer inevitably sees the very real SMTP problem as a cryptonail in the end. It's natural when you have a "solution in search of a problem" situation like we do with crypto (and block chain, and for that matter SharePoint. People with knowledge of a thing often try to use it to solve problems it probably wasn't meant for.) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kiernian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago Aside from one (seemingly very out of place at the time) early mention that the author used Bitcoin, there was no hint of it being pro-bitcoin until the very, very end. I found it to be a very worthwhile article right up until that point and even slightly intriguing from an academic perspective after that point. I despise the endless blind parroting of the typical cryptobro refrains elsewhere on the Internet when crypto is brought up and I still liked the article, so I wouldn't write it off just because one guy with a cryptohammer inevitably sees the very real SMTP problem as a cryptonail in the end. It's natural when you have a "solution in search of a problem" situation like we do with crypto (and block chain, and for that matter SharePoint. People with knowledge of a thing often try to use it to solve problems it probably wasn't meant for.) permalink fedilink source parent
[–] smeg@feddit.uk 7 points 2 years ago It is an interesting history of email though, it's only the final 10% that even mentions bitcoin. permalink fedilink source parent