On 2014-11-18 16:34, Nan wrote: > Alexandre, do you really believe that anyone could "deserve to remain a > slave"?
In the meaning “it’s normal/understandable/explainable to be a slave if you want freedom without doing nothing to get it while other want you not to be”, yes. But all the importance of the meaning is in the “if” part. I think if someone do nothing, or do anything anyway, it’s for a reason, or, to be more precise, a cause, and I call this reason deserving freedom itself an initial lack of freedom (of thought, if you want). So for me, actually, “deserving” doesn’t exist, doesn’t have any true real meaning, just as “merit”, “duty”, “pride”, “shame” (in their meaning, not their objective existence as a sentiment) or “free will” (in its meaning opposed to determinism). > Assuming you don't, I'll address your calmer points. > >> mygroup.org can be corrupted, menaced or cracked. > > Sure, a server is a single point of failure for the group, and must be > carefully configured and protected. From the point this server isn’t you, it’s never “protected” enough. You could maybe protect *enough* (and only *enough*, never “perfectly”). And that’s just about “cracking”, which is just a technical concern, not the more important. Because menace and corruption still exist. You could say you trust your provider… which is already really really really hard… is your provider independent from thing such as money? corruption? power? And even if it were, arguing that nodaways anybody could resist to currently existing powers and authorities is a fallacy. > It's still much safer than hoping users will protect themselves. Not “hoping they will”, making so they will, because it’s the only way to deal with. As I said everybody learned to read and it’s more complicated than basic crypto usage. As I said systems rebuilt from scratch upon these ideas can be much simpler than everything existing before. And with context changing, need will come, and people, when they need it, can adopt something really quickly, at least as fast as they can. >> the change of roughly everything > > I prefer solutions that protect as many people as possible now. I didn’t say all of that were incompatible ;) They’re short-term as long-term solutions to things that need to change.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
