3 ms·

Do you really think criminals won't build private communication systems on their own anyway? I'm less interested in the public eye and more interested in the p

by tendto 3y ago

Do you really think criminals won't build private communication systems on their own anyway? I'm less interested in the public eye and more interested in the private substance. If I had the option, I'd rather do business with a machine instead of a person or business, if the protocol for doing business can be proven to not need trust. This appears possible only with machines. It's possible for a messaging service to feature anonymity and privacy and prove the messaging protocol to be trustless. Whether you want all messaging services to be public and run by known people or not is irrelevant. Anonymous, private messaging is possible, growing and possibly inevitable. Choosing to have more power in your words with your good-name behind them is exactly this: a choice. Not an obligation. If you're complicit to a crime, the method of communication being encrypted or not doesn't absolve you from the crime.

bruce511 3y ago
I don't disagree with your points. However should your system attract criminals then I eould not use it myself. Partly because then the chance I'm talking to a criminal goes up, and partly because of reputational damage to me. In other words, you are focusing on the service itself, and the appeal to non-criminals. I'm focusing on (my projection of) your user base, and my desire to be associated with them. Good luck with your endeavour.
- tendto 3y ago
  Thank you for the thoughtful response. If your most gratuitously positive interpretation is that an anonymous and private messaging system will be used only anonymously with no other feature whatsoever, and that people who know each other won't identify themselves to each other as they do in real life should they choose to, and that the majority of the user base will be criminals, and that this business you know little of is a criminal enterprise, then this system isn't for you.

by tendto 3y ago

bruce511 3y ago

I don't disagree with your points. However should your system attract criminals then I eould not use it myself. Partly because then the chance I'm talking to a criminal goes up, and partly because of reputational damage to me. In other words, you are focusing on the service itself, and the appeal to non-criminals. I'm focusing on (my projection of) your user base, and my desire to be associated with them. Good luck with your endeavour.

tendto 3y ago
Thank you for the thoughtful response. If your most gratuitously positive interpretation is that an anonymous and private messaging system will be used only anonymously with no other feature whatsoever, and that people who know each other won't identify themselves to each other as they do in real life should they choose to, and that the majority of the user base will be criminals, and that this business you know little of is a criminal enterprise, then this system isn't for you.