Re: [GNU/consensus] [SocialSwarm-D] Consensus on the aims of this group

[Simon Hirscher]

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Nick Jennings <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Because every project [again: I know
>> of] is just paying attention to one or, at the maximum, two of those
>> points and on the other hand makes it damn hard or simply impossible
>> to solve those other two or three issues at the same time.
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. By trying to solve one or two
> of the 4, it makes solving the other two harder?

Not necessarily. What I meant was that projects tend to focus on one
or two of those four points. In order to fulfill them, however, and
also due to restricted resources (time, developers etc.) they neglect
the other two – which, in turn, might indeed mean that they decide to
use technologies that only enable them to solve a strict subset of
those problems. Web technologies are a classic example – because you
can't trust the certificate authorities, you're running 3rd party code
all the time, and don't even get me started on cookies and the like.

> To say that you can't, for instance, provide self-determined data storage
> because there is a possibility it could be compromised, is like saying you
> can't run an HTTP server because it could be hacked. There is value in
> making things better, and giving users more autonomy, and working toward
> better circumstances.
>
> […]
>
> You *can* provide self determined data storage *and at the same time* you
> can further illustrate the remaining vulnerabilities.
>
> You *can* provide a better method for point-to-point encryption *and at the
> same time* point out the vulnerabilities in the existing DNS system.
>
> Yes, these things wont be perfect. But they *will* be better, and they
> *will* be progress, and there will be less remaining problems to address,
> which will be highlighted more so, because solving some problems can improve
> clarity of remaining problems to a larger audience.

Agreed, there is value in making things better. But I'm here for the
solution to *all four* of our problems. Why? Because…

1.) It's within our reach and I hate to settle with anything less than
what's possible.

2.) We are facing the biggest adversary one could possibly imagine:
The NSA. (Also: other intelligence agencies and some huge companies'
CEOs, all of which are having wet dreams about big data). With respect
to their resources, "better" and "some progress" is just not good
enough.

3.) We, the SocialSwarm, set out to create an actual alternative to
Faceboogle – for the masses. That however means that we only have one
single shot to get it right. People won't follow us from one platform
to another, more secure one every year.

On a similar note:
I'm actually a bit surprised that there are people on this list
complaining about those four requirements. If they really wanted to be
a part of the SocialSwarm initiative and help with creating a secure
Faceboogle alternative that's actually ready for mass adoption, I
wonder what they were thinking this was going to take? A bit of HTML
thrown onto some web server? No offense guys (and sorry for the harsh
and probably even unjustified words). If you're not down, that's
absolutely fine. Keep doing what you're doing. Because, as Nick said,
there IS value in making things better!

As for me, I think this is going to be my last post on this topic for
the time being. Everything's been discussed extensively, now, and I
should better invest my time in finally finishing reading tg's paper
on the GNUnet/PSYC/secushare API.