4 ms·
> I addressed it in a comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22045670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22045670 As I read that, users must trust you
by mirimir 7y ago
> I addressed it in a comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22045670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22045670
As I read that, users must trust you. There's nothing that would actually prevent you from accessing the data.
So it's arguably misleading to call it a "private diary".
- ViViDboarder 7y agoI disagree. I believe that it’s more common for “private” to mean “between you and the company”. Eg. Private accounts on other services, or private information associated with your account.
- mirimir 7y agoYou certainly have a point about "private". As you say, with a service provider. Or with family, friends and associates. But none of that is relevant for "private diary". There, it's privacy between you and your diary.
- ViViDboarder 7y agoPlenty of people had “private” LiveJournal accounts back in the day with no expectation that it was a zero-knowledge system. Just that they weren’t sharing it. I may not be a good indication of “most people”, but I just don’t think that most people think of privacy in the way that we (folks who know details of encryption and metadata leaks) do.
- mirimir 7y agoFair enough. But that's the problem, isn't it? I mean, many people do (sort of magically) think that their online stuff is private. And then they get pwned in one way or another.