3 ms·
His claim was that it was intrinsically less secure, not that the government was stoping him
by anologwintermut 13y ago
His claim was that it was intrinsically less secure, not that the government was stoping him
- mpyne 13y agoWhich I would argue is correct. It seems to be intrinsically difficult (to say the very least) to have a communications system that is open to anyone to send messages to a given address (even if the sender is not known), and supports queueing messages for eventual delivery so that both ends don't have to be online at the same time. The 'Pond' system mentioned elsewhere in this thread looks promising, for example, but that system doesn't allow for unknown people to send messages. This is perfect for many communications needs but can't supplant email entirely. But I'll note if I'm reading the user guide [1] correctly that it's going to be very difficult to setup contacts, exchange messages, etc. in something like Pond, which would make its usage inherently suspicious (and liable for increased attention thereby, if we assume general domestic surveillance). [1] https://pond.imperialviolet.org/user.html https://pond.imperialviolet.org/user.html
- plg 13y agoSee https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6183352 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6183352