On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Nico Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Natanael <[email protected]> wrote: >> Does anybody here take quantum crypto seriously? Just wondering. I do not >> see any benefit over classical methods. If one trusts the entire link and >> knows it's not MitM'd in advance, what advantage if any does quantum key >> distribution have over ordinary methods? And isn't it just as useless >> otherwise as the ordinary methods? > > It's that time of the year again :) Maybe we can save ourselves the > trouble (assuming there's really nothing new to add here, and I do > think there isn't) and just say "read the archives". > > Nico > > PS: If you do read the archives you'll see I'm in the "QKD is a > curiosity/novelty" camp. Oh gods, not this discussion again… While it may be a curiosity/novelty it is at least a **sexy** curiosity/novelty, and has all sort of utility in marketing material. While "marketing" is often a synonym for "lies" it (apparently) has value… W > _______________________________________________ > cryptography mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography > _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list [email protected] http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
