4 ms·

I think you're being obtuse, either intentional or not. The technology is useful because of what it does, and my ability to use it is irrelevant. In a "nuclear

I think you're being obtuse, either intentional or not. The technology is useful because of what it does, and my ability to use it is irrelevant. In a "nuclear fusion is a useful technology" sense. Everything else I've explained twice now should have made that explicit and abundantly clear, so, I think I'm done here. Feel free to not continue this conversation.

jmercouris 6y ago
I think many open source technologies drop the ball when it comes to integrating a nice application. Seems that the protocol and implementation is nice, but the user interface is lacking. Perhaps that is not an interesting part of development for the GPG team.
- megous 6y ago
  There are many GUI frontends for GnuPG, if that's useful to someone: https://www.gnupg.org/software/frontends.html https://www.gnupg.org/software/frontends.html
nindalf 6y ago
You said "usable" when you meant "useful". And then you got upset when I took your comment at face value. Talk about childish.
- okamiueru 6y ago
  That was indeed a autocorrect issue, and if that was what caused the confusion, I apologize. I've also done nothing but reiterate the same point from the start, which you seemed quite opposed to consider. This has also devolved into name-calling, so, not sure why you bothered at all. Even if admittedly, the word "usable" (hard to misunderstand in the context, IMO) should have been "useful", the usable part of this could very much have been for other knowledgeable software developers/designers for it to be the backend of something user-friendly. As such, not even "usable" in that context would have been wrong. Regardless, this would require some modicum willingness for benefit of doubt, which, I do not expect at this point. My only advice to you, is that perhaps don't assume people are children, and perhaps you'll find it easier to see meaning in their arguments.

jmercouris 6y ago

I think many open source technologies drop the ball when it comes to integrating a nice application. Seems that the protocol and implementation is nice, but the user interface is lacking. Perhaps that is not an interesting part of development for the GPG team.

megous 6y ago
There are many GUI frontends for GnuPG, if that's useful to someone: https://www.gnupg.org/software/frontends.html https://www.gnupg.org/software/frontends.html

nindalf 6y ago

You said "usable" when you meant "useful". And then you got upset when I took your comment at face value. Talk about childish.

okamiueru 6y ago
That was indeed a autocorrect issue, and if that was what caused the confusion, I apologize. I've also done nothing but reiterate the same point from the start, which you seemed quite opposed to consider. This has also devolved into name-calling, so, not sure why you bothered at all. Even if admittedly, the word "usable" (hard to misunderstand in the context, IMO) should have been "useful", the usable part of this could very much have been for other knowledgeable software developers/designers for it to be the backend of something user-friendly. As such, not even "usable" in that context would have been wrong. Regardless, this would require some modicum willingness for benefit of doubt, which, I do not expect at this point. My only advice to you, is that perhaps don't assume people are children, and perhaps you'll find it easier to see meaning in their arguments.