"SMTP has outlived its usefulness" (was: Forwarding services)

This is not true.

You can always layer anonymous communication over the top of completely observed communication. We have robust techniques to accomplish this, robust against all but very focused attacks by very powerful nation-state actors. E.g., we can run onion routing nodes such as Tor, and host services /within/ Tor (so, even crack-downs on Exit nodes would not stop this), and we can run anonymous, distributed messaging protocols over the onion-routed overlay network (e.g., Session as one example).

That can be done robustly enough that it is infeasible for even extremely powerful state attackers to halt within a society - unless they turn off the Internet entirely, but then... packet-radio is now ubiquitous, and basically everyone carries devices in their pocket with 2+ of them. So even if the Internet were turned off, we still can run (logically) anonymous messaging over mesh networks in dense urban areas. Social attacks - i.e., infiltration, informants, etc. - are the only feasible way to really stop this.

So... these laws to stop anonymous messaging are ultimately pointless to some degree. Course, the point is to make anonymous messaging /costly/ - in convenience if nothing else - for most people. If it's niche and inconvenient enough that only nerds use it, that is probably enough so that - if the time ever comes that the need arises - the masses will not know how to use these tools to organise themselves. That is what the authorities are betting on.

What we should be doing, as technologists, is making these tools more convenient for daily use. In some cases, they're already pretty good and it's just a question of making the masses *aware* these tools exist and are useful. E.g., Session is pretty good as a replacement for WhatsApp for p2p messaging - it just needs the network effects. Or perhaps Snikket may be good enough (has groups, which Session doesn't easily have) - not checked it out yet.

Decentralised and near-impossible to stop by malevolent states *is* possible. Just network effects and social mores to get people to care and switch. But perhaps that only happens if events conspire to make it painfully clear to them - hopefully not too late.