37 ms·

I wish people would get involved with projects like Cryptocat instead of pointing the finger with some kind of superiority that will never construct anything, a

by boi_v2 13y ago

I wish people would get involved with projects like Cryptocat instead of pointing the finger with some kind of superiority that will never construct anything, at least this is what I would do if I were a Cryptographer, but why bother? It is better to work for a bank and use others mistakes to make some self-promotion and maybe feel better with myself. You missed a excellent opportunity to make some good.

dionyziz 13y ago
You're right. However, the guy actually did write a patch for Cryptocat, so you have to give him that.
- _djo_ 13y ago
  Which was subsequently modified to make it less secure before being added to the project. That tends to dampen one's enthusiasm to contribute.
  - thezoid 13y ago
    It's always fun to watch patches you make to projects get removed or changed a few weeks/months later for arbitrary reasons :(
jlgreco 13y ago
If I were to write a book that pretended to teach laymen how to perform major surgery in their own kitchen, would it be reasonable for real surgeons to tell me to knock it the fuck off, or should they "get involved" and attempt to provide me with constructive criticism?
- StavrosK 13y ago
  Your analogy means that people shouldn't expect to have secure group chatting capability. It would be more like (groan) saying "I want to perform surgery in my kitchen so I'll just read some books while I'm opening the person up, but real surgeons are telling me to knock it the fuck off and read all the books before trying it". It's legitimate and commendable to try to write your own cryptosystem, but winging it is not going to end well.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    No... People can expect secure communications, just like they can expect lung transplants. They should should not expect either done by an amature rejecting supervision. There was nothing wrong with what they wanted done, only with who was doing it and how.
    - StavrosK 13y ago
      In your analogy: * Writing a book = developing cryptocat. * Knock it (writing the book) the fuck off = stop developing cryptocat. * Real surgeons = cryptographers. * Teach laymen how to perform major surgery in their kitchen = communicate securely. If people "can expect secure communications", then, by your analogy, people "can expect to be taught how to perform major surgery in their kitchen". They cannot both be expected "to be taught how to perform major surgery in their kitchen" and not expect to have it "done by an amateur rejecting supervision". Hence my amendment to the flawed analogy.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        * perform major surgery = communicate securely. * Teach laymen to .... in their kitchen (ie, the shit that is hopelessly wrong about my surgery book) = the shit that is hopelessly wrong about cryptocat. I think either works fine.

by boi_v2 13y ago

dionyziz 13y ago

You're right. However, the guy actually did write a patch for Cryptocat, so you have to give him that.

_djo_ 13y ago
Which was subsequently modified to make it less secure before being added to the project. That tends to dampen one's enthusiasm to contribute.
- thezoid 13y ago
  It's always fun to watch patches you make to projects get removed or changed a few weeks/months later for arbitrary reasons :(

jlgreco 13y ago

If I were to write a book that pretended to teach laymen how to perform major surgery in their own kitchen, would it be reasonable for real surgeons to tell me to knock it the fuck off, or should they "get involved" and attempt to provide me with constructive criticism?

StavrosK 13y ago
Your analogy means that people shouldn't expect to have secure group chatting capability. It would be more like (groan) saying "I want to perform surgery in my kitchen so I'll just read some books while I'm opening the person up, but real surgeons are telling me to knock it the fuck off and read all the books before trying it". It's legitimate and commendable to try to write your own cryptosystem, but winging it is not going to end well.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  No... People can expect secure communications, just like they can expect lung transplants. They should should not expect either done by an amature rejecting supervision. There was nothing wrong with what they wanted done, only with who was doing it and how.
  - StavrosK 13y ago
    In your analogy: * Writing a book = developing cryptocat. * Knock it (writing the book) the fuck off = stop developing cryptocat. * Real surgeons = cryptographers. * Teach laymen how to perform major surgery in their kitchen = communicate securely. If people "can expect secure communications", then, by your analogy, people "can expect to be taught how to perform major surgery in their kitchen". They cannot both be expected "to be taught how to perform major surgery in their kitchen" and not expect to have it "done by an amateur rejecting supervision". Hence my amendment to the flawed analogy.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      * perform major surgery = communicate securely. * Teach laymen to .... in their kitchen (ie, the shit that is hopelessly wrong about my surgery book) = the shit that is hopelessly wrong about cryptocat. I think either works fine.