Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/12/09
10/12/09
I would never count on any opinion or prognostication by the WSJ to have much value.
SMTP will live forever. Newsgroups were supposedly dead twenty years ago, too. The kicker for me was the sendup of sharepoint as a miraculous way for companies to decrease email traffic. Yeah, right.
I'm not sure how old Jessica is, but my guess is that she has never known a world without email. Jessica, dear, I can't wait to see you write the same article in 20 years, when email is still alive and well.
Oh, and by the way, X is still very much alive. I'm running an XServer and a bunch of XTerms right now. Love 'em.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
Or less subtlely put, that person's retarded, in the freeflowing 1980's sense of the term.
Unless there's a new medium that is controllable by each originating organization, e-mail will not be replaced on an intra- or intercorporate level. Records are needed, responsibility of said records is needed, and if we assume that a cloud-like entity will absorb this traffic anytime in the short term, it would appear that Orwell had a coup that I missed out on.
10/12/09
10/12/09
Second, what's wrong with fax machines? Most of my stuff is PDF. But if I'm circulating a document that requires signatures from a variety of companies or firms, odds are, I'll fax it around. Everyone has it; everyone can read it.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
(1) Not going to pull out the old argument of "X isn't dead, because I'm still using X!"
(2) People said X would be dead with Y (IM), but X isn't dead, because I'm still using X!"
(3) Other things may someday replace most of the functionality of X, but we will still use X, so X isn't dead!
(4) V (fax) isn't dead, because we are still using V! Therefore X isn't dead, because people still use X!
(5) I currently use X to sign up for Z, therefore X isn't dead, because I'm still using X!
10/12/09
10/12/09
By I, he literally meant "I," not "one" or "people." And so by "entrenchment" he meant that the speaker is uniquely entrenched, not the technology will survive because it is entrenched.
Grazie!
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
I don't do well without sarcasm tags sometimes....
10/12/09
Wave is open sourced and their IO presentation talked about it being easily hosted and modified on other servers (even making fun analogies to Office Space).
10/12/09
10/12/09
so if the WSJ is predicting a global mega-catastrophe, they might be on to something. but email is just mail done electronically, and mail hasn't died, and mail has been one of if not the principle purpose of written language since written language was invented.
whatever replaces email, if anything, will just be email by another name. i dont want to send voice mail or video mail to anyone - i enjoy taking the time to write a carefully thought out email. the other two options put me on the spot - i'm funny but i'm not fucking wayne brady, and yeah, sometime it takes me a few minutes to come up with something clever. the other thing is, some things are only clearly expressed in print - making an empirical argument to someone via voice is clearly an inferior cognitive vehicle. they can mishear you, or forget a nuance of what you said, one must speak quickly, which makes one prone to misspeaking, and it's infinitely more painful to rewind a recording than it is to move your eyes up a couple lines.
the WSJ is dead. maybe that's what they meant/
10/12/09
10/12/09
i throw off some shit on the spot, but if i'm trying to harp on at great length about something, weaving an ever more ludicrous tapestry of absurdity, there's a cadence that can be fine tuned for maximum effect.
it's the difference between live TV and a Hollywood film. you get as many takes as you want, and the shit ends up on the editing room floor.
10/12/09
10/12/09
@Anonymoose: MATT DAMON
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09