Hi Hellekin, Thanks for sharing this campaign! I'm happy to see that it achieved it's goal. I've submitted it to many groups, interested in the project and I hope it helped.
There is also one additional opportunity everyone interested in Free Software projects could use:https://coboat.jovoto.com/briefing . A company called Coboat, which offers co-working space on catamaran with satellite connection, is ready to sponsor 7 interesting projects with 2 weeks to 100 days free stay on the boat with another entrepreneurs. It's a great opportunity to start up a project and mingle with interesting people. There is no limitation about the project area. I'l be happy if a Free Software project gets some traction. Best Regards,Svetlina On Thursday, September 3, 2015 4:41 PM, hellekin <[email protected]> wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 09/03/2015 10:18 AM, carlo von lynX wrote: > > Maybe I'm biased. What do you think, hellekin. Am I missing a piece > of the picture? > You know I'm all for diversity. And I share many of your critiques. But I still think that Tox has interesting things to bring. First, I'd like to see an actual security audit of the beast. Many people I trust on security and cryptography seem to despise Tox. I want proof. I want the Tox community to face the music and see whether they can fix the stuff, or shift to a more secure foundation, such as, tadaa, GNUnet. I also think that even with all its flaws, Tox has the great advantage to have achieved what GNUnet should have achieved during the same time: a community of diverse, motivated people who are able to contribute their part of the project: there are several different GUIs for Tox that can be inspiration for GNUnet Conversation for example. As Jake reminded me recently, there are already decent alternatives to Skype: Redphone on Android, Signal on IOS, Jitsi on the rest. Still, I think Tox has to go all the way through the microscope: the developer community has a lot to learn from its history. If a security audit demonstrates many flaws, well, at least we're fixed. If they're fixable, let them be fixed. If it's FUBAR, then that's yet another argument for free software developers to actually watch better before rushing in and code their life away. In both cases, better developer documentation is definitely needed, and a security audit as well. Note: the security audit is not part of this crowdfunding campaign, but there's a good chance that OTF can fund one. Tox has many things right: the license, using NaCL, GUIs, etc. I'm not qualified to evaluate the code, and from what I've heard so far, it's been frowned upon. Still, there are more people working on Tox than on GNUnet, so it's important to know whether their effort is useful or if they'd better hop on the GNUnet bandwagon. Ignoring the project won't help doing that. == hk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJV6E3NXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFQ0IyNkIyRTNDNzEyMTc2OUEzNEM4ODU0 ODA2QzM2M0ZDMTg5ODNEAAoJEEgGw2P8GJg9QOcQALRt67rlNpXPps3QItpxx+ix 0xTKxthYVgiqi08SkZSLS+SqUB3I9wjjmBXeDwKNqcy4i9020dGKjfpjrp4x7wYK eqr1qj0vhmNaQKOH+ktdqrXTFZAau6jLVGlZJtjsyQH/ry5G5eyT0YIN+i7QAWAF jgWVSWpSBKuBiF+DvXdTnbVXuqVuiKTA3ehvvWZ6pmgha4bsudw6aTvqdGttIoaB 1bW83mvlbztWO52SoQNsxscdHfiFU4gQp4GeaeTj8azNQpYAEKMx7kBYJqpku4w0 UlGMaROe0Wlesd9On1gVtPWGN+5+kS4/mWMIThWoX3nqDlYylLNNH2NtnBMEoHXG bvcBk353AxLF6azgkglRDYCWhv1rDTTyvocLkM9I+4va0IdUYqBSIzahWdAga97i 5J3stxj8yI46T/VDHKl4iK70ThHpAHnW4a0nnP1FL0ywyv7RnDFyO6hillHPnpDT pjFjqNC/3T+KfsxpOJ66FmfuRNYDLDMBX6JLJfX5+YKCLF6+FujwoRSX0vzhx9a9 ijIJXsl+4iIFCFQN+Fk4nPcLlB88StxHN3JJD4MAPOZtAE1WUFXST6YhqbhlmMQY fhKFAagKcRBReE1AeqkoJPIvYwdVwJKLI8HBXY2PSIT2u2jF3CO77JG8EKfVoRvw 1+L4w9RFG0n807dWgs3N =rjNC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
