-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"tcmay" == Timothy C May <tcmay@sensemedia.net> writes:
tcmay> Integration of crypto into Netscape is thus the Big Win. tcmay> I felt this was the case as far back as last fall, but my tcmay> recent experiences tell me this is more important than tcmay> ever. Integration of PGP and other crypto routines into Tin, tcmay> Pine, Elm, Joe, Emacs, etc., is just not as important. Careful here. Deliberately or not, you are marginalizing the hard work of dozens of people, including me. You are suggesting our work should have been done for Netscape instead, a program that a) is not free software (FSF sense); b) has no mail reader; and c) has no extension language. Oh, and d) is horrendous as a news reader. The packages that you implicitly denigrate provide far and away the best interfaces to PGP available today. They are written with the tools available, whether it's a Windows shell, a hacked version of Elm, or an Emacs Lisp package. Maybe Netscape will include a mail reader someday. Maybe Netscape will include Java as an extension language someday. But until that day, the only people who can put crypto into Netscape are the folks at Netscape Communications. tcmay> IBM just paid nearly $3 billion for Lotus, largely for the tcmay> "common platform" of Lotus Notes. I believe Netscape is an tcmay> even more important common platform, and will displace Notes. Netscape is not a platform. It is a browser. It is only useful for viewing content that others have created, with a user interface that any idiot can use. Consequently, yes, it is very popular with the masses and will become more so. tcmay> The relevance for Cypherpunks interested in writing code is tcmay> that, in my carefully considered opinion, writing for Netscape tcmay> and other Web browsers is the Big Win. Even over Windows tcmay> (except Windows browsers, of course). Can you name a platform for which it is possible to write a PGP front end, but for which none has been written? If it is ever feasible to do what you suggest, someone will do it; your musings will have no effect on that. If you want to make a difference, try writing some code yourself... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.3beta, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMA6Rg3r7ES8bepftAQG4egQA2QFjXo5wgVOCtz2qGkgBbw80F4U80C1p d1noVQN95tFYc1vjgk0ftp8n5stURtuD6MEoHNoKDOQgCIzbPlEC9rIETAzW1kfd GTG8DzRqkcY1YqrTEnLoNiUswIfkVaquf9JrWNSuPKzLZ+IsUto1SxxNjk0fR7pf ou4k3Fo+3yQ= =BpNr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----