Encrypted mailing lists?

[Lance Cottrell]

I think there is probably more value in signed mailing lists than encrypted.

If it is encrypted, and the process is anything less than absolutely seamless and transparent, it is likely to drive away a large fraction of the readers.

I hardly have time to read or respond to the messages as it is. Add even a few second per message and I would drop out.

	-Lance

--
Lance Cottrell
loki at obscura.com



On Aug 21, 2013, at 9:49 AM, John Young <jya at pipeline.com> wrote:

> Worse, why limit a cypherpunks list to only those who
> use encryption? Several of the cpunks' bastard offsprings set
> up their own gated communities, unable to put up with those
> who ridiculed their advocacy of really really opinionated
> discussion of the glories of crypto.
> 
> What has been learned since early days of cypherpunks
> is that all encryption is faulty and survives on willing suspension
> of disbelief. Not the math, oh never, which is as infallible as the
> Pope and Muhammad, it's the disbelievers in other people's
> faith-based communities and who are dedicated to finding faults
> over there to divert attention from those in here.
> 
> Still, even back then, encrypted messages were posted by
> enthusiasts. Nobody answered, many said get the fuck out.
> 
> 
> At 12:20 PM 8/21/2013, you wrote:
>> What's the point of encrypting the output of a mailing list to which anyone can subscribe?
>> 
>> -jp
>> 
>> --
>> Jeffrey Paul  +1-312-361-0355
>> 5539 AD00 DE4C 42F3 AFE1 1575 0524 43F4 DF2A 55C2
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2779 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20130821/25ba060c/attachment-0001.txt>