259800+ entries in 0.09s
mircea_popescu: which is how humanity managed to inch its way to this sad time when it's about to kill itself a thousand different ways
mircea_popescu: this is specifically because, historically, the individual is more important than the group
mircea_popescu: this is not some sort of random contrivance of boredom.
mircea_popescu: so the fundamental statement is "the group is more important than the individual"
mircea_popescu: wheras as proposed, gossipd makes the enemy outright impossible.
mircea_popescu: it is fundamentally broken and will never work exactly because it simply presumes the adversary wins.
mircea_popescu: the tor bs is an attempt to "fix" in implementation problems to whose existence it not merely contributes, but moore! whose existence it actually postulates.
mircea_popescu: this is paid for, somewhere, by someone. who is paying but me ? even if i can't show where it leeches me, it does. why should i ?
mircea_popescu: more importantly, hitler IS a lot more in that than he would be in this.
mircea_popescu: for all he knows, they're all in cahoots, sending him lulz.
mircea_popescu: artifexd you might discover it hurts you, much like the low level usg employee who thinks the fed helps him would soon discover his lot would be better without that bit.
mircea_popescu: well yes. all the signed chats of everyone = everything. absolutely as 1 = 1.
mircea_popescu: and whence and wherefore should he have anything but nothing ?
mircea_popescu: how is giving the bum EVERYTHING lowering him in any sense ?
mircea_popescu: in both cases, we are discussing user Panopticon, who sees all and says nothing. now, in spec as is, it is true that user P will know... nothing. correct ? whereas in your proposed spec, he would know... everything. correct ?
mircea_popescu: ok, let's work a different way. let us compare two scenarios.
mircea_popescu: let's go the other way. why do you think it would so lower them ?
mircea_popescu: i think i explained it half a dozen different ways, to exhaustion, but am at a loss as to why what seems obvious is not communicating itself.
mircea_popescu: the same relation as between you and me, in the scenario.
mircea_popescu: or, if you prefer, elevating the source to the rank of a connect.
mircea_popescu: that, it does. but it makes no representation they are from me.
mircea_popescu: you know my key, you directly verify my client is signing correctly, what is keft ?
mircea_popescu: at issue is your proposal to make this a reality for people you don't know.
mircea_popescu: well since you're concerned with what he might say or believe, it seems he does.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform because whythe fuck do you care what some people you doin't know say on any topic ?
mircea_popescu: to the tune of monty pytrhon's every sperm is sacred. no, they do not.
mircea_popescu: fundamentally your argument reduces to a deep seated "all peoples matter"
mircea_popescu: quite exceptional walk through the very points involved.
mircea_popescu: a screening of "a man for all seasons" is in order here.
mircea_popescu: it is folly to even consider this point. focus on what is within your control.
mircea_popescu: what the clueless "believe" can not ever be your concern.
mircea_popescu: rather than some conveniently diddled , horrible implementation designed for the needs of the nsa
mircea_popescu: this specifically aims for reconstructing sane chat, online.
mircea_popescu: i don't see much has improved since the recording machine era. do you ?
mircea_popescu: fact is, they only do if you wish to implement them. i do not.
mircea_popescu: none of their fuckinbg business. if they weren't invited to participate they can not RELY on the discussion.
mircea_popescu: artifexd i do. it's the equivalent of making a weirdo reality where anyone who eavesdrops also has a recording device.
mircea_popescu: because we don't work for the group here. we work for the individual.
mircea_popescu: the moment you add them to your list, they have continuity.
mircea_popescu: the existence of unknowns should be entirely at the mercy of the knowns. no exceptions and no way out.
mircea_popescu: anmd there's plenty more, but srsly... how much is needed.
mircea_popescu: this harms because : it gives unknowns a weight they should not have ; it removes the incentive for users to police at their local level ; it allows third parties to construct undeniable chatlogs that they had no business in.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: what you propose : 1. friend to friend and unknown to unknown relations are the same thing.
mircea_popescu: currently : 1. friend to friend relations are entirely cryptographically secured. 2. unknown-to-unknown relations are not secured, and must proceed through a friend of either party to even happen.