They just really want to get to know you.

I have started using message.casa.

Its called superuser chauvinism.

I think selfhosting should be as normal as owning a car and as easy as using a phone. It’s because I think people should run the internet, not billionaires.

I have wanted to self host ever since I joined the fediverse 5 years ago. Always ends up with one or another error message that I cant get through. But I might give this a chance.

One thing I wish I knew earlier is the “man” command to display the documentation of a command.

I’m on kolektiva.social. Nothing to complain about.

They always do.

In other words, you say that we should just give up.

I think the way we are trying to make technology sound sophisticated and our refusal to reinvent language makes technology become much less accessible than what they should be.

I’ll not say what I’m using, because I haven’t figured it out yet.

However, what I seek are:

• Frugile / lightweight / nighsome - Using few resources so that it is easy to take ownership over. This will also increase flexibility.
• Open - Not restrictive licensing. Post-dominating mindset.
• Human Selfhostability - The approach should be as accessible as possible for anyone seeking to take ownership over it. Frugality is also important to achieve this.
• Human centric - People should not adapt to the approach, but the approach has to adapt to people.

I put this comment out to check how brainwashed people are. Just because something is open source doesn’t mean that the software in it’s totality is good. It’s a good place to start for sure, but we need to delve deeper into what we demand from our software.

deleted by creator

It’s open source, so it’s fine.

PrivacyBrowser is a really good browser in my opinion. But I cant do an analysis on its privacy.

I will add that I love how they handle bookmarks.

Who is RFC?

I’ll say this much, the sign up was super easy. Only need your name and a hook to create an account.

email fans are like:

Email is an open protocol and therefore we dont need this.

Openness doesn’t mean flawless. Openness doesn’t mean it is good. The protocol of BlueSky is open, but gives only the mighty the ability to take ownership.

I don’t know why they think email is good enough, it must be something irrational.

…

Email is distributed.

It is certainly not distributed. Today it is a mix of oligopoly and decentralized. If it was distributed, it would be as easy to host an email service as it is to own a phone. Entirely possible, but not the reality of today.

Tuta wasn’t able to succeed and therefore this is not going to succeed.

Just because somebody has failed before, doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

They are targeting the tinfoil hat people.

…

People don’t care.

If you say this, then you are out of the discussion. Let adults speak instead.

A comment section full of strawmen.

If you are going to criticize this project, you need to criticize how they present their ideas. Perhaps you disagree how they portray email. Then you can say something like, “it is not an issue that a few corporation host most of the emails of the world.” You can say “A significant amount of funding comes from xxx and this compromizes their integrity.” You could say “Open email sais that their protocol is private, but why do they not implement superduper encryption”.

With Mail/HTTPS, self-hosting email is as simple as running a website.

That sounds amazing!

I’m all for software that greatens our ability to selfhost. I’ve heard it’s very hard to host email. If open email delivers on this, it might just have what it takes to survive.

Im just dropping out of it entirely.

No surprise.