On 07/10/14 02:30, Andy Isaacson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 12:41:15AM +0100, Ximin Luo wrote: > Of course a malicious-client-tolerant distributed cryptographic system > will have a somewhat different set of failure modes to convey to the > user, but I'm just responding to the argument that it is impossible to > design a UX to handle even the simplest case of transcript inconsistency > (of a missing message in the history). The existing modern centralized > chat systems handle this case OK and users find it acceptable. Let's > achieve feature parity in a distributed system and get on with finding > and solving the actually hard problems. >
"Simplest case of consistency" is not the problem. I described the problem in the first post. I only want to talk about specific issues mentioned in there; you are extrapolating a bit in what I mean by "can't do [X]". Maybe my words are not the most clear, but if you can tell me which specific parts are not clear then I can respond to correct it. I can't respond to vague things that don't talk about what I was referring to. X -- GPG: 4096R/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE git://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Messaging mailing list [email protected] https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging
