And let's bear in mind NSA-resistant not just by virtue of good data and communications bits but also my means of being able to communicate with or without the public Internet. If everyone is a network node for some portion of a collaborative data set that can be exposed in various levels of permissioning, then you have the opportunity to walk around monitoring issues - sometimes literally.
All the best, John Blossom email: jblos...@gmail.com phone: 203.293.8511 google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > "nsa-resistant*" > > Thats absolutely a good plus point in this day and age. Its wouldn't be > "proof" by decentralization but > certainly makes things more resistant. > The idea of a federated protocol that lets people selectively share stuff > with others is going to be harder to spy on (on mass) then a nice convient > all-in-one-place Google or Facebook server. > Don't trust Bobswave server? Then start your own! Then you own have to > worry about stuff shared with bobswave users ;) > > This could be quite a selling point - both to individuals, but also > to company's worried about trade secrets being lost. > > > ~~~ > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :) > > > On 5 December 2013 16:29, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) > <sten...@stenyak.com>wrote: > > > This can be a good idea, and I agree with the general design and goals > > of your project. > > > > I'm not sure whether this should be a replacement for WiaB, or just a > > parallel project that can evolve side-by-side, but if you go forward > > with it, we'd just have to wait and see how users and possible > > contributors react to it (I'd definitely contribute however I can, be it > > code, paypal-beers or whatever! :-) > > > > Random suggestion: I'd try to direct/promote the project (amongst other > > people, of course) towards those who want nsa-resistant* and open source > > whatsapp alternatives. > > > > (*) whatever that means... (it can not be worse than current email > > protocols hehe) > > > > On 12/01/13 05:03, Joseph Gentle wrote: > > > I still really want to make the wave platform we've been talking about > > > for awhile. I just don't have any time because I need to work to eat. > > > > > > So I've spent the last month thinking about running a kickstarter to > > > fund the work. Christian's email was really timely. > > > > > > > > > I want arbitrary JSON documents, or arbitrary embedding like we talked > > > about a few months ago. > > > > > > I want a protocol based on real P2P algorithms rather than the hacky > > > mess we have at the moment with trees of servers connecting via an > > > XMPP extension > > > > > > I want the same fundamental protocol to work server-server or > > > server-client. The OT stuff should work like git. > > > > > > No single person can maintain our 500k of legacy java code. I want to > > > write a better version with much cleaner separation of OT protocol and > > > application specifics. I still want a web client, but it should be > > > written in pure javascript. > > > > > > Messages should be cryptographically secure from snooping. > > > > > > > > > The way I see it, there's fundamentally three pieces that make up wave: > > > > > > 1. A set of OT primitives which allow peers to generate & interpret > > operations > > > 2. A platform on top of (1) for exchanging operations between networked > > peers > > > 3. An application on top of (2) which is trying to replace email > > > > > > These pieces should be separate from one another, and usable in other > > contexts. > > > > > > I have a clear idea of how we can make (1) and (2) work. The OT part > > > we've talked about on the list and I've been slowly prototyping out > > > here: http://github.com/josephg/tp2stuff > > > > > > I have a bunch of applications I want to build on top of a platform > > > like this. For example, I want my text editor, compiler & unit tests > > > to all talk to one another so my text editor doesn't need > > > language-specific completion or syntax checking, and so my friends can > > > jump in and help me code. > > > > > > I don't know what the best way to build (3) is - but I'm more than > > > happy to build the platform that a new kind of email could be built on > > > top of. Maybe the current WIAB design is totally fine for that part - > > > though I want end-to-end encryption. > > > > > > I don't know when the right time to do this would be. I don't know if > > > I should work alone or if we should put a team together (Hi Ali!). If > > > I were to do this properly it would take about a month of prep to get > > > a kickstarter together, and if it is successful I'd want to quit my > > > job to do it. I think it'd take me about 6 months to a year of work to > > > get a stable, secure platform working (probably closer to a year), and > > > I'm also not allowed to stay in the US without an employer on my visa. > > > > > > The earliest this will probably happen is the end of the year. > > > > > > Kickstarter might also not be the right way to fund it. Cryptocat was > > > funded in 2012 mostly by Radio Free Asia's Open Tech Fund[1] to the > > > tune of ~$100k. A kickstarter would give us users (great) and > > > publicity, but the right private sponsor might also work. > > > > > > Maybe the most contentious part of all, I don't think I'd want to call > > > it wave. But it really would be the grandchild of what we've been > > > working on all this time. > > > > > > Thats my thoughts. If anyone has any ideas, I'm all ears. As I say, > > > I'm keen to build this, but I'm too old to live on ramen in a granny > > > shack. This thing we've been working toward has real value, and could > > > be put to great effect if we can actually make it good. > > > > > > -J > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://crypto.cat/documents/report-1213.pdf > > https://www.opentechfund.org/ > > > > >
