Email immutability matters more in a world with AI

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Reaction to Fastmail and AI in Email

  • Many commenters praise Fastmail specifically for not adding AI features and for offering a “boring,” reliable, traditional inbox.
  • Several users explicitly say they would leave (or already left other services) if AI “assistant” features are bolted on or prices are raised “for AI.”
  • Some do want modest conveniences like automated categorization (Gmail-style tabs), but still strongly reject AI assistants or intrusive UX changes.
  • A few note the blog post is about protecting against AI abuse and internal AI policy, not shipping AI features, though some still perceive it as marketing.

Self‑Hosting vs Hosted Email

  • Debate over whether self‑hosting email is viable: some report decades of success with good deliverability; others hit persistent rejection from big providers (especially Microsoft, sometimes Gmail).
  • Factors cited: domain age, IP reputation, DKIM/DMARC/SPF correctness, blacklists, and “warming” IPs. Results are mixed and somewhat provider‑dependent.
  • Separate tangent on Cloudflare “blocking” privacy‑focused browsers; others say they’ve never seen this, suggesting it’s setup‑dependent.

Is Email Really Immutable?

  • Core idea: email gives you your own uneditable copy, unlike mutable web pages, chats, or social feeds.
  • Multiple commenters push back:
    • Servers can alter messages; email historically was not designed for integrity or secrecy.
    • Modern HTML emails often reference remote assets (images, tracking pixels, live components) that can change or disappear later.
    • Gmail “dynamic email” (AMP) and similar features from Google/Microsoft effectively allow content inside an existing message to update over time.
  • Proposed mitigations: providers could snapshot remote content on receipt; users can favor plain‑text email, which is simpler and more robust.

Cryptographic Authenticity

  • DKIM can help prove messages weren’t altered, but long‑term verification is hard because keys rotate and are rarely archived.
  • Some effort exists to archive public DKIM keys; others advocate regularly publishing private keys to prevent old signatures being used as immutable evidence.
  • Individual users can sign and, optionally, encrypt mail with GPG to make tampering detectable, though setup is non‑trivial.

AI, Media Authenticity, and Evidence

  • Broader concern: AI makes rewriting history and fabricating photo/video evidence easier.
  • Suggested responses: camera‑level watermarking/signing, device‑integrity schemes, and social media “real” badges for verified captures.
  • Strong skepticism that such systems can’t be bypassed (e.g., filming high‑quality screens, government key access, user apathy about authenticity).
  • Courts already deal with manipulable evidence; AI is seen as a dramatic increase in ease and scale, but not a completely new problem.

Other Product & Ecosystem Notes

  • Some see the Fastmail piece as a straightforward ad; others appreciate the stance but note Fastmail still uses AI indirectly via vendors and internal tools, under policy constraints.
  • Complaints that AI is mostly used for engagement/marketing, not for solving real pain points like spam (email being ~99% noise for some).
  • Questions around Fastmail’s large base storage (60 GB) and lack of alternate uses for that space; one reply argues it’s a good multi‑year, not‑forever retention sweet spot.
  • Calls to support web‑wide immutability via services like archive.org as a complement to email’s relative permanence.