The idea of unsubscribing from emails from corporations and agencies is again just an act of pretense. 95% of the cases, it's not done in one click and involves a series of a few confusing steps. Even from a technology perspective, email is fucked and a legacy artifact as of today.
I would love to see a more secure protocol to replace it, where the recipient always has full control over all the messages that he can ever receive.
I have a paid personal email plan on my own domain name. (Mostly to get aliases and plus addresses). It is setup very well and filters spam very efficiently, compared to some 'corporate-standard' filters on other services. But I still have to use my gmail address because most individual contacts wouldn't see my mails otherwise since they are on gmail, hotmail, etc. And for many official websites, my email addresses are 'not valid email addresses'. Granted that my TLD .space isn't an official sounding one, but it's used by exactly two types of users - people who use it as their space, and people/organizations working on space tech. So I pay, but I'm still forced to watch them spam. Honestly, I believe that email is now a captured monopoly (cartelopoly?).
> I would love to see a more secure protocol to replace it, where the recipient always has full control over all the messages that he can ever receive.
I wholeheartedly agree. Email is an awesome idea. But its age is starting to show. We need something with security and encryption built-in, much fewer moving parts (Can we integrate MTA, MDA, WebUI, spam filters, DKIM, etc into just one?), option to opt out of rich formatting (the HTML and AMP junk), dynamic updates, etc and proper spam filtering, etc. We should also have a way to disincentivize or punish big players from rejecting valid emails. Perhaps it can use HTTPS to overcome those pesky corporate reverse proxies and firewalls. But the idea of having a domain name as a namespace for users is still precious.
My experience has been the complete opposite as someone who had to it recently. Only a handful made it more arduous than a single click. I was surprised.
Most people are on Facebook Messenger or Whatsapp or Signal or a dozen similar platforms. I try to use Signal for most communications but have friends and family that won't move to it, so I also use Whatsapp or plain SMS with them.
The only people who use RCS to contact me are businesses sending notifications or spam.
Unlike e-mail where I do get personal correspondence regularly.
I don't expect my experience is typical, but I don't think yours are either - we all live in bubbles.
Email is auth now. People do not use email the way you are describing.
Even assuming all encryption is configured correctly at the endpoints so we can discount the risk of mid-transit interception and comprehension (do I assume CVS has encryption set up correctly on their outbound receipt emails? I do not...) People think it's like the postal network but it's more like the mail lands at the post office and they hand you a copy of it, while they retain the originals.
The words probably get read somewhere on the way to the destination and in the future someone will probably unpin the pretty picture that has been decorating the notice board, turn it over and read what is on the other side.
If you want secure messaging that nobody else will snoop on use an application dedicated to.. secure messaging. It's never what email was for and it's not how it's being used.