----- Original Message -----
> From: Russell Edwards <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc:
> Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 5:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Email Encryption Basics
>
> On 17/11/12 01:22, Michael Rogers wrote:
>> In the real world it's not possible to run a mail server on a home
> broadband connection,
>
> Could have fooled me..!
>
> Works fine for me.
>
> My $0.02 is don't bite off more than we can chew. Get people's primary
> data storage off "The Cloud" first. Then worry about MITM.
>
> Email is the easiest thing to get off the cloud. Social networking is the
> bigger
> problem - probably more personal info, certainly much greater interlinkage,
> and
> so far as I have seen NO truly decentralised viable alternative in
> development.
> (No - Diaspora, Friendica and Friendica Red are not inherently
> decentralised-nor
> is StatusNet) The conception of FBX as a "server" - albeit supposedly
> a personal server - is a little concerning in this regard. Any server
> software
> designed to host multiple users has nothing major in its way from becoming
> the
> next ultraconvenient ultracentralised Facebook. Perhaps a truly peer-to-peer
> architecture is the only way to prevent this.
Let me define "social networking" as both "general social networking" in the
sense of
email, microblogging, etc., and "social networking software" in the sense of
software
with a UI in the friendster -> myspace -> facebook many-to-many wall-post
commenting
style.
It seems to me that "social networking software" is inescapably at odds with
any privacy-
preserving system. Data-leakage of personal info in the implicit sense
(selling data
to third parties) obviously characterizes the centralized social networking
software, but don't
forget that data-leakage in the explicit sense-- friends of friends able to
read comments,
frictionless growth of social movements or marketing campaigns, ability to
search and find
any other user of the system-- is the core feature upon which every single
benefit of any social
networking software is built. I say "data-leakage" and not "data sharing",
because the way
in which the user's personal data traverses the social graph is beyond the
grasp of any user
who doesn't have the time and money to do a 6-month research project on the
privacy
implications of using the software. If this weren't the case, "social
networking software"
would just be called "email".
Public personal info is public, and private personal info is private. When you
start trying to
mix the two in the same UI you're going to confuse users and either end up
negating the privacy
benefits of the FBX or enabling second-rate social networking software with so
much friction
on data leakage that it defeats the purpose.
-Jonathan
>
> Russell
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
