On 7/22/19 13:42, Ryan Carboni wrote:
The design of systems meant to prevent quick and secure options in a world where every corporation has been breached is human stupidity, clearly. The violation of expectations that online computer systems are authoritative sources of authentication should be more inviolable than it is, though the government may very well have a wanton disregard for social norms.
What systems are these that "prevent quick and secure options"? As far as I know there is nothing stopping things like OpenPGP, OMEMO, and roll-your-own SIP-based services. Remember the posts about NNCP (basically, an Internet- and sneakernet-capable replacement for UUCP with security built-in)? I would like to see and would be willing to help coordinate a large interconnected network based around it (though I still believe it's a legitimate use case to use it for smaller friend-to-friend-type sharing).
I wonder what would the US government do if there is extensive video evidence that the country's leaders are largely pedophiles. First they would assume the videos are fakes. There is still the issue that most of the videos are apparently unique compared previously seized or circulating materials.
It may be a while before it's taken seriously, but remember, Nixon did eventually resign. Some notable Republicans are starting to leave the party after some of DJT's antics. Between this, all the crazy shit DJT has done, and the Mueller report, I think the collapse of the Republican party is at least more likely than not at this point. I just don't know if it will happen before the 2020 election, shortly after, or long after.
Anyway, in ten years, there won't be a need for more than a total of 5 public IPs on the entire internet.
This I have serious doubts about. We would not be spending all this time on IPv6 if this was not the case. -- Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com> http://www.rantroulette.com http://www.skqrecordquest.com