4 ms·
Do cryptographers really have to keep saying things like "PGP sucks shit" and give the impression that the author was completely stupid? The author wrote this
by palata 2y ago
Do cryptographers really have to keep saying things like "PGP sucks shit" and give the impression that the author was completely stupid?
The author wrote this in 1991 and humbly called it "pretty good privacy". 30 years later, kids say "it sucks shit" and call their stuff "actually good encryption", hinting that they believe they are so much better than the PGP author more than 3 decades ago.
I don't know, can we show some respect, or is it too much to ask?
- some_furry 2y agoThe blog post did not attack the people that created it in 1991. It criticizes what we have today. What we have today is a mess of legacy cruft that is still heavily evangelized by people that don't know better. Enough with tradition. Enough with reverence for the past. What matters more is what's the better solution. If we continue to insist on this veneer of "respect", it will just make the PGP evangelists think they're in the right.
- palata 2y ago> It criticizes what we have today. I understand that. But the tone does feel very condescending to me. And this article is not isolated in that sense. Let me just give one example from another article of this blog: > But before I do, a quick reminder that me criticizing XMPP+OMEMO isn’t an endorsement of weird or stupid alternatives, like using PGP. I don't know, if I was the PGP author, it would not make me feel good.
- some_furry 2y agoThe PGP author doesn't read furry blogs.