A world without trust is not better – by @dhh
@aral does @dhh have a bot in the fediverse. He’s one of two twitters
That I miss. The other being the long now foundation.
@jsparknz @aral He gives zero support for his thesis. Of course the best case is absence of need for trust. Trust /is/ risk. There's nothing favorable about that. If you must trust, then lots of factors come into play and turn a straight-forward decision into a fuzzy one. It's better for your email payload to be PGP-encrypted so you don't need trust vs hoping the MitMs don't exploit.
@aral @jsparknz @hypolite When you realize the separation of duties, that email is a means to get data from A to B & crypto serves to mitigate disclosure, then of course email /can/ be used to move a payload without disclosure. It doesn't matter that email predates PGP. PGP over email is cumbersome for many novices with some implementations, but there are exceptions, but this is red herring territory.
@hypolite @jsparknz @aral #Hushmail came close enough to solving the social problem. A novice can open a HM acct as easily as a Yahoo acct. An external expert user can do all the key management on hushtools.com. And for me that worked. I was able to get accountants & lawyers to use crypto effectively. Novice-to-novice => HM-to-HM. BTW, the latacora.micro.blog link is dead for me.
@hypolite If you look at the 10k foot view of my point, you need not accept PGP email. That example muddied the waters. I could have more simply stated: we don't discard encryption in favor of trusting those who see the payload. It's better to use encrytion because it removes some componts of needed trust. I see no case for increasing the need for trust.
@hypolite Indeed, crypto doesn't remove the need for trust in all situations. But it does remove the need for trust in many cases, and that's a *good thing*. Whenever you can remove trust in a systim, it's /beneficial/ to do so. My thesis is the opposite of the authors.
@hypolite Ah, I've read that article. It came out shortly after an over reaction to a flaw was discovered (and fixed) in a couple particular PGP implementations. It's FUD. The premise is the same as what you mentioned ("this wasn't designed for that"). A lot of innovations are derivatives of other wildly different innovations. You don't say microwaves are bad for cooking food b/c they were meant to be radars.
@hypolite If you don't like the magnetron example, I'll give a super glue example. Super glue was designed to seal off open wounds in the battlefield, to replace stitches. It turns out the toxicity made it bad for what it was designed for. But it was discovered that it was great for gluing housohold items.. a purpose that it wasn't designed for. We don't reject Super Glue simply because it's not being used for what it was designed.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!