Soatok

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Soatok@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago

Yeah, I've got a proposal that's being worked on: https://github.com/soatok/mastodon-e2ee-specification

[–] Soatok@pawb.social -1 points 2 months ago

If they actually read the whole thing, including the addendum, there should no longer be any confusion.

As a rule, I never change titles after pressing Publish.

[–] Soatok@pawb.social -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Anyone incapable of reading past the title is not worth listening to

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The framing is as follows:

Matrix, OMEMO, whatever.

If it doesn't have all these properties, it's not a Signal competitor. It's disqualified and everyone should shut the fuck up about it when I'm talking about Signal.

That's the entire point of this post. That's the entire framing of this post.

If that's not personally useful, move on to other things.

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 6 points 2 months ago (6 children)

This is a very technology focused view. In any user system, the users themselves have to be a consideration too.

As I wrote here: https://furry.engineer/@soatok/112883040405408545

My whole thing is applied cryptography! When I'm discussing what the bar is to qualify as a real competitor to a private messaging app renowned for its security, I'm ONLY TALKING ABOUT CRYPTOGRAPHIC SECURITY.

This isn't a more broad discussion. This isn't about product or UX decisions, or the Network Effect.

Those are valid discussions to have, but NOT in reply to this specific post, which was very narrowly scoped to outlining the specific minimum technical requirements other products need to have to even deserve a seat at the table.

 

Hi,

My name is Soatok and I'm a silly sod who didn't realize creating a community would automatically make the the moderator of said community, so I've been asleep at the wheel this whole time due to personal reasons.

Anyway, I'm going to correct this oversight immediately. Sorry for the inconvenience.

view more: next ›