Topic: Privacy is the most valuable thing that belongs to you. (Read 606 times)
RetroShare is quite easy to use, might even be grandma-compatible, but it's quite a monolithic piece of software, we need something more modular and more web-like
Lower barriers help, but don't you think most people neglect data security b/c they simply don't value [or understand the value of] privacy?
somewhat amusing paper - Ben Laurie decries PoW&spam almost a century ago (in internet time)
http://goo.gl/xObnG
somewhat amusing paper - Ben Laurie decries PoW&spam almost a century ago (in internet time)
http://goo.gl/xObnG
What's so amusing about somebody being correct? As an anti-spam solution, PoW was never successful, and mostly for the reasons he gives.
Edit: Sorry, I misunderstood your comment. It does have a light hearted tone and funny title
Exactly and I find that Bitcointalk has the most liberal policy allowing for most privacy
i'm not quite sure i understand what you mean. would you care to elaborate a bit?
Exactly and I find that Bitcointalk has the most liberal policy allowing for most privacy
The reason why most people do not use encryption is because it's too bothersome to use existing solutions like GPG. What we need is an easy (that means, no bitmessage's hashing and "takes 5 minutes to send a message") way to communicate - something persistent.
Do not use proof of work for messages. Botnets sending out email spam will still send out PoW spam. Message delivery and permanent storage should not be guaranteed - rather, read notifications is what should be.
this community should pool all of the great minds and come up with a new framework for privacy. great post TF. this deserves a sticky imo. We have to stand up for our rapidly diminishing rights. Don't know what its like down under but i can feel the noose tightening in the states. Do not use proof of work for messages. Botnets sending out email spam will still send out PoW spam. Message delivery and permanent storage should not be guaranteed - rather, read notifications is what should be.
Lower barriers help, but don't you think most people neglect data security b/c they simply don't value [or understand the value of] privacy?
somewhat amusing paper - Ben Laurie decries PoW&spam almost a century ago (in internet time)
http://goo.gl/xObnG
somewhat amusing paper - Ben Laurie decries PoW&spam almost a century ago (in internet time)
http://goo.gl/xObnG
The reason why most people do not use encryption is because it's too bothersome to use existing solutions like GPG. What we need is an easy (that means, no bitmessage's hashing and "takes 5 minutes to send a message") way to communicate - something persistent.
Do not use proof of work for messages. Botnets sending out email spam will still send out PoW spam. Message delivery and permanent storage should not be guaranteed - rather, read notifications is what should be.
Do not use proof of work for messages. Botnets sending out email spam will still send out PoW spam. Message delivery and permanent storage should not be guaranteed - rather, read notifications is what should be.
Jump to: