[ih] Unhappy with the free service (was Re: The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet)

[SM]

Hi Jack,
At 11:03 14-05-2012, Jack Haverty wrote:
>Some such technology exists today.  For example, I'm using GMail right
>now, but I can bring up Evolution instead.  By simply clicking a
>checkbox, it will send my email signed, so the recipient can believe
>it's from me and/or encrypted so that only the recipient can read it.
>Similarly when I receive such email, I can be confident of its content
>and source.  However it seems that few email users have embraced such
>technology, and few if any organizations promote it.

Some organizations take a faith-based approach when it comes to email. :-)

>As others have pointed out, "we" - the Internet community - have a lot
>of work to do.  But I think time is running out.  There are
>alternatives.   I've noticed lately that people like my relatives -
>very non-techie - are enraptured with their new-found ability to
>communicate with each other and their friends and neighbors.  It looks
>like email, but it's actually social networking layered on top of the
>Internet.  They have email accounts, but they prefer using the social
>network.  They can send text, pictures, videos, etc., and not worry

Yes.

>about malware, phishing, or other such frightening Internet
>"features".  Of course, they all have to be inside the same "walled
>garden" to interact - but that constraint is preferable to the

The "walled garden" is not apparent.  It is only seen as a constraint 
by the user can no longer enter the "walled garden".  That's a 
statistically insignificant number.

>perceived risks of the wild and wooly world of Internet email.   They
>are at best dimly aware of all the robots watching over their
>shoulders, and don't seem to care - at least as long as everyone they
>want to interact with is inside the same garden and therefore
>accessible.   Email, and even the Web, may be overshadowed by The
>Garden(s).  Soon.

Why should they care?

Coming back to the subject line, one might argue that if someone is 
unhappy with the free service, nobody is forcing the person to use 
it.  I wonder whether it is understood that the free service would be 
history if it wasn't for the content provided by some people to the 
free service.

Regards,
-sm