> PGP is fucking complicated, annoying, and non-user-friendly to use as a computer literate individual that codes for a living. I really don't think it is. Yes

> PGP is fucking complicated, annoying, and non-user-friendly to use as a computer literate individual that codes for a living. I really don't think it is. Yes, it took me two days or so of reading stuff and chaining commands when I was using mutt. Enigmail is literally point and click. You follow a wizard with three screens or so to set up and all you need to learn after that is how to do the whole web of trust thing. It takes about as much time as it takes to learn Word's stupid track changes mode. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it even easier to use, but it's in a state where it's pretty much useable without being a hacker. > Shouting "GOVERNMENT SCARY" at them isn't going to work. Not only government scary. People don't understand that snooping e-mail isn't done only by the government, it's also done e.g. by, and for the benefit of, media agencies. The combination of Gmail and Google's bubble alone is enough to limit everyday choices for them, like purchasing things, learning about controversial matters and planning a holiday. Even in the post-Snowden world, most people don't understand that there is a huge audience for personal data besides the NSA, and it has an impact on everyday life beyond scary slogans like surveillance state. > On top of all this, you're pushing encryption as a philosophical measure rather than a practical one. The same can be said of many things that otherwise look idealistic. People are also pushing for widely-available education, or research in fundamental topics like particle phsyics, for what look like "philosophical" reasons rather than practical ones. The gap between "philosophical" and "practical" seems to be one of volume: it's "philosophical" when few enough people understand why it's practically necessary. It's a trait of perception, not an inherent trait of the object, which is why I think it's a matter of education. 30 years ago there seemed to be very little practical value in PCs, too, and anyone pushing for widely available computer use was, at the time, as much philosophical as I am about this today :-). Edit: not that I am denying the gap that exists between implementing purely philosophical principles and implementing purely philosophical principles in a practical way. Linux is, in many ways, less "free" in terms of philosophy than GNU Hurd is. I'll gladly buy a gallon of beer for anyone reading and replying to this post from a computer that runs GNU Hurd.