Re: [GNU/consensus] Map of Projects / Sessions at 30C3

[Andreas Kuckartz]

carlo von lynX:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 09:47:42AM +0100, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
>> I have added "FederatedSocialWeb" as a project, which stands for the
>> "W3C Federated Social Web Community Group".
> 
> hehe.. http://secushare.org/federation

Well, I am tolerant regarding most of the views expressed on that page ;-)

If I had to choose the name of the Community Group again, I probably
would propose another more general one. Other decentralised or
distributed approaches are welcome and represented in the W3C FSW CG.

Changing the name was briefly discussed a few months ago but it is
difficult and now would not make sense because the W3C is currently
preparing a larger more official Interest Group which likely will simply
be named "Social Interest Group". The charter is being discussed.

BTW: As long as this discussion is taking place using a federated
communication system I do not think that federation has become irrelevant.

>> It is extremely
>> likely that such a proposal will not lead to a positive result. If such
>> a law is accepted it will contain legal requirements to implement
>> backdoors in end-to-end encrypted communications for so-called "law
>> enforcement" purposes.
> 
> that is off the point. the point to make here is to make people
> understand that a legislation that actually implements the
> constitution is feasible. it's not about who manages to mess it
> up in which way. of course the moment you have it in parliament
> it will suffer from harsh attacks on its solidity.. but that
> ain't new. and it only gets worse if you didn't even try.

That does not convince me to support such a proposal. It is spreading
illusions in the European Parliament not educating people.

> the pirates have non-representative chair persons saying stupid things.

Which by itself says a lot about the party.

> where did he say anything like that?

http://www.freitag.de/autoren/felix-werdermann/die-empoerung-ist-geheuchelt

http://www.piratenpartei.de/2013/07/22/piraten-fordern-reform-der-geheimdienste-und-der-parlamentarischen-kontrolle/

> the official PP-DE position on
> secret services is to abolish them,

Really? Where? Even if such an "official position" exists it obviously
is irrelevant in practice: The secret service supporter Bernd Schlömer
is still chairman of the German Pirate Party.

> web browsers are not suitable for private communications. they should
> be used for accessing websites.

They _are_ used for private communications. And I am not aware of any
reason why they can not be sufficiently improved regarding security and
privacy.

> by making that clear in the design
> requirements we work towards our goal, creating an alternative to
> abusing the web for things it wasn't designed for.

There are several good reasons why the (vast) majority of users does not
want to install software in addition to a web browser to be able to
communicate with others. Alternatives or design requirements which do
not take that into account will not lead to a different situation.

Cheers,
Andreas