On Fri, May 7, 2021, 6:16 PM coderman <[1]coderman@protonmail.com> wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 hello Karl, replies below as usual :) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Friday, May 7, 2021 2:56 AM, Karl Semich <[2]0xloem@gmail.com> wrote: > > This person posted a complete design for crucial freedom technology > and signed their real name to it, with no associated implementation. > > We badly, badly need such technology, and people have been designing > things like it for many years now, without successfully getting > their implementations used. > > Why are people still publishing designs without implementations in > disruptive channels, after all these years? there is always a tension between publicity and privacy in this situations. you want participants to help with the projecy, but you don't want detractors or malicious individuals drawing focus away from getting work done. in the ideal world, a decentralized reputation system would scrutinize potential members before incorporating them into a group. in practice, we always seem to rely on real-world networks and digital groups with poor reputation metrics. overall, i think the benefits of publicity outweight the potential harms. it's better to be open! It's good to be open if you have crucial new design information and don't need to finish. But you need something to keep the work alive first if it can be used to subvert a major dictatorship or law enforcement tactic. It's really great to be open! It's needed! But using your real name puts your entire project at risk. YMMV best regards, -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iNUEAREKAH0WIQRBwSuMMH1+IZiqV4FlqEfnwrk4DAUCYJW8HF8UgAAAAAAuAChp c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0NDFD MTJCOEMzMDdEN0UyMTk4QUE1NzgxNjVBODQ3RTdDMkI5MzgwQwAKCRBlqEfnwrk4 DH+bAQCXAZhro27d95064mrDo+q9BY3ThAc5fsLjc5kTaqsVTQD+KA8NhGoJdM1W niT7xjmT2xPxdJqVp0/mhhOEbWq+htE= =UCHv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- References 1. mailto:coderman@protonmail.com 2. mailto:0xloem@gmail.com