One problem I see with this is that if one's email somehow gets onto a spammer's list, there's likely no way to change their email address, since it's presumably formed from an ID number of some sort.
1. Have this "official" email only for communication with "state" entities, or some such filtered allow-list. It would be fantastic to have a high-SNR electronic channel for "all the important govt bureaucratic stuff". Folks could always forward mail to a unified inbox if they wish, but regardless they get an effective filtering tool.
2. For non allow-list entities, charge some trivial amount for every incoming mail that goes unread or gets flagged by a user as spam (or some such). I suspect this will quickly change the economics to make most spray-and-pray crap to become unviable.
In essence, as with any communication system, I think the most important design goal is to have high SNR (Signal-to-Noise Ratio) channels which we can suitably label for specific delineated intents. We shouldn't be treating the inbox as a monolith with all pieces of uniform importance (or dictated by the shiny content of emails); we should be able to leverage IT to have the system work in the user's interest -- it's a matter of setting up incentives/responsibilities.
Uptake has been so limited, it‘s essentially useless.
That said, I think might make sense as an address system for signing and verification. It'd be nice if I could just sign into a local municipality or state-level server with a national ID to read notices and do verification, instead of walking to the city hall and twice in a week and uploading drivers_license.jpg to weird e-commerce websites on random occasions.
> presumably formed from an ID number of some sort.
One possible solution is that the address for an individual must be obtained from a directory before sending a mail. Allowing for the possibility of changing it in the future. Access to that information can then be granted/revoked by the individual as they see fit. Something similar to re:claimID.