CDR: Re: ZKS goes GAK

[Anonymous Remailer]

>If the original Freedom product is:
>
>a. as unbreakable/untraceable as was originally planned (verdict is out, IMO)
>
>and
>
>b. is continued to be supported and distributed
>
>then why would the new "trusted third parties" system be needed?

Risking to fall into the doomsayer trap, I would call this a
classical "bait  switch" technique.

Bait was a genuine product, probably developed by the genuine
company and people.

Switch happened later, when men with guns decided to pick up
this thing.

But what really pisses me off is that seemengly intelligent
people keep on ranting about their intentions. Who the fuck
cares what the intentions are/were ? Establishing trust with
the crypto-savvy is what ZKS did. That asset is owned by
whoever owns the company, not by hired hands. And the use of
that asset will be whatever they decide.

Creating such an asset brings responsibility, and ZKS folks failed
there: their work will be used for other purposes, and there is
nothing they can do about it.

Assuming that one can make money by providing protection from
the people that print that money is just plain silly.