On 10/05/2012 01:22 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Who says we should promote anything? Nobody ever elected me Grand
> Poobah of the Internet. I don't think anyone ever elected you, either.
> Instead of telling people what they should do, what's wrong with giving
> people options and telling them
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 23:45, expires2...@rocketmail.com said:
>
>> > Routinely encrypting *all* communications would transform the "chore"
>> > into an habitual routine that requires little-to-no intellectual
>> > effort in respect of each individual message sent or file stored. The
>> > value of t
On 09/09/2012 10:04 PM, antispa...@sent.at wrote:
>
> It's sad to see that Pretty Good Privacy is just about pretty good and
> nothing more. People don't seem to care beyond playing 007.
Finally, *someone* gets it. You always have to push the bar of sec and
crypto. Not wallow in routines and compl
evidence of your "Anonymous Coward" theory? You see without the "data to
support" , your "pet theory"
Unsupported assertions regarding your opinions about the likeness of my
name to slashdot "Anonymous Cowards" simply cannot be "taken very
seriously".
F
Well, PKI is used by at least one country on a national level , it works
pretty well,
http://bankid.com , it is issued for free by all major banks, and there
are other PKI solutions issued by a few other companies which have
national adoption. You pay a bit extra with your mobile carrier if you
w
On PKI,
I fear that the property of it being so decentralized, and relatively
free, is the same reason why it does not have wider adoption. It is not
a centralized product, nor is trust maintained by any government /
private institutions (banks, clerks, notaries, etc ) to prove identity.
So, thus..
An addendum, is the component that is neccesary for 4gw.
Netwar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netwar
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-
On 08/28/2012 04:56 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 28.08.2012, No such Client wrote:
>
>
>> I simply chose to keep my name private. Surely, on a public, crypto
>> mailing-list, with all sorts of interesting people, the idea of
>> privacy
>> would be understood no
On 08/28/2012 03:55 PM, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 28/08/12 15:44, No such Client wrote:
>
>> Surely, on a public, crypto mailing-list, with all sorts of interesting
>> people, the idea of privacy would be understood no? real names or pseudonyms
>> should be quite ir
On 08/28/2012 04:01 PM, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 of August 2012 15:44:53 No such Client wrote:
>
>> Is it not the content that counts?
>>
> Yes, but if the content is controversive and with debatable argumentation
> then
> only your credentials r
On 08/28/2012 03:48 PM, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 28/08/12 15:37, No such Client wrote:
>
>> smut? You imply that I speak in a perverse or sexual manner? Hardly.
>>
> I didn't want to actually quote the insulting stuff, but let me quote
> nonetheless:
&g
On 08/28/2012 02:31 PM, Hubert Kario wrote:
>
> The fact that you've just showed up on The list makes this e-mail and
> pseudonym disposable, not the fact you're using a pseudonym or gmail.
>
> Besides, gmail is very much disposable. It's not like you have to provide
> your
> name, surname and I
On 08/28/2012 10:28 AM, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 28/08/12 08:57, No such Client wrote:
>
>> # A good Daddy is discreet. :-)
>>
> (Etcetera...)
>
> Please take your smut elsewhere. I'm sure you know people who will laugh; tell
> it to them. Not here.
>
Juicy one faramir..
> What would happen if you start reading your daughter's diary
> everyday, but never let anybody catch you reading it?
#Daddy may say that he is being a good father by keeping an eye on his
kids, for her... happiness and safety of course. He knows best. (replace
the father wit
On 08/28/2012 04:20 AM, pants wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 03:54:19AM +0200, No such Client wrote:
>
>> Why put your pubkey up forever, to make it easier to socially or
>> technically attack your comms?
>>
> I mean, by having access to a public key turns th
On 08/28/2012 03:52 AM, No such Client wrote:
> and putting your key on a keyserver.. No thanks..
>
> If you're against publishing your public key on a key server, why are
> you signing messages with your private key and sending them to a public
> mailing list? No one receivi
On 08/27/2012 11:00 PM, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> Why is it a problem that most people don't see value in signing and
> encryption?
>
>
-> People are generally complacent, narrow-minded, emotional beings who
for the most part, see little value in long-term thinking? The question
posed here is the sa
Sir Hansen:
Well, pseudonyms do not make my words less valid. I am not one of the
gpg-using advocates, who has to be open, and forthcoming with all to
make a point. A pseudonym is well within my rights. You simply don´t
need to know. That assymetric advantage is your own fault. It was yor
choice t
Nice angle Stan.
Peter M , you sir are on point.
Faramir, my personal perspective is that good software should be
like.. gnu/linux. Simply enough for simpletons/ average joes/janes to
use,but adaptable enough to grow and adapt to meet the needs and skill
of the user.
Robert Hansen - (You sha
19 matches
Mail list logo
