On 24/10/11 19:25, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
With respect to your question: what we offer is privacy, but most people
do not understand privacy, do not care about privacy, and would not care
about privacy even if they understood it.
So if we can't motivate users by showing the bad stuff that can
I have a group of certificates listed that I am unable to delete. I
have tried using GPA and from the command line. Neither works. I did a
screen capture of these keys. This is the URL:
http://seibercom.net/logs/FP1.png
These appear to be listed in the
On 10/25/11 5:26 AM, Peter Lebbing wrote:
So if we can't motivate users by showing the bad stuff that can
happen if you have no privacy, then how to do it? I don't see any
other way.
Years ago W.D. Richter wrote a fictitious interview between the two
fictitious characters Reno Nevada and
d...@geer.org wrote:
With respect to your question: what we offer is privacy, but most
people do not understand privacy, do not care about privacy, and
would not care about privacy even if they understood it.
[snip]
You got that right, Brother.
To be more pointed, how many folks on this
On 25/10/11 14:54, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Every now and again I'll meet someone who's interested in learning
about privacy and how to protect it. I do my best to help these
people along. That's what I can do, that's what's within my power,
that's the standard I judge myself by -- how well I
On 10/25/11 10:57 AM, Peter Lebbing wrote:
The problem with the current proposal in that respect is that it
requires co-operation of e-mail providers.
I disagree. The problem with the current proposal is it offers email
providers no payoff for their work. If it could credibly be said,
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 23:02:32 -0400
d...@geer.org articulated:
To be more pointed, how many folks on this list carry a cell phone?
I carry one virtually all the time. It is sort of in my job
description. I have to be available 24/7.
--
Jerry ✌
gnupg.u...@seibercom.net
On 25/10/11 17:09, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
I disagree. The problem with the current proposal is it offers email
providers no payoff for their work. If it could credibly be said,
implement STEED and you'll get 25% less spam across your network,
email providers would be lining up around the
So, to summarize what I think I've been hearing: the problem which
remains to be solved (if it is a problem) is a nontechnical one, and
no amount of technical wizardry will solve it. The most that can be
done now is to be ready to help someone who fears for his privacy and
asks, what can I do?
On 10/25/11 5:17 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
[rest of message, which *lacked* a signature, elided]
Wow, that's a wacky error. Time to file a bug report in Enigmail!
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
On 25/10/11 21:11, Mark H. Wood wrote:
So, to summarize what I think I've been hearing: the problem which
remains to be solved (if it is a problem) is a nontechnical one, and
no amount of technical wizardry will solve it. The most that can be
done now is to be ready to help someone who fears
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Tuesday 25 October 2011 at 10:26:57 AM, in
mid:4ea680e1.6070...@digitalbrains.com, Peter Lebbing wrote:
On 24/10/11 19:25, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
With respect to your question: what we offer is privacy, but most people
do not
On 10/25/2011 15:46, MFPA wrote:
An oft-used analogy when promoting encrypted communication is to compare
it to sending a letter in an envelope rather than sending a postcard. If
people don't care about privavy, why did envelopes rather than postcards
develop as the default for sending
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/25/11 6:46 PM, MFPA wrote:
If people don't care about privavy, why did envelopes rather than
postcards develop as the default for sending messages through the
post?
This one should be obvious: because a postcard doesn't allow you to
write
14 matches
Mail list logo
