>Most people using it are just stupid. Attacking the strawman. No one man will revolution JS crypto. Not you, not Turning. Mathematicians are involved, when th

>Most people using it are just stupid. Attacking the strawman. No one man will revolution JS crypto. Not you, not Turning. Mathematicians are involved, when they all agree on stuff generally they're right. The systems your proposing do nothing. And you know they do nothing. >that means that they may be useful to people who are aware of the security But you don't care. Its a false sense of security. Your selling rice paper advertised as bullet proof vests. That's my problem. Yes these programs are entertaining thought experiments, but in the real world they're useless. And if you advertise them as being anything other then useless, you're no different then an 1860's snake oil sales man. :.:.: Also you mentioned assumed risk. Assumed Risk is understanding that there exists OpenSSL exploits you don't know about, you have no way of fixing, and no way of preparing for. You have to assume this risk to achieve any level of security. You have to be mindful that the landscape of security can change at any moment, and maybe render you insecure. Assumed Risk does not mean your using a broken cryptosystem, and you know its weak points that exist BY DESIGN. And are fundamentally impossible to patch out. That's just called broken crypto.