To give Amirouche some ideas how it could be improved: http://turbomilk.com/blog/cookbook/icon_design/10_mistakes_in_icon_design/ To me, quite a pain point is the text. Also: https://design.tutsplus.com/articles/7-principles-of-effective-icon-design--psd-147
Still, by common human interface design standards (see links in the links) the current icon is maybe not ideal, but good. > On 26. Jan 2018, at 20:45, Schanzenbach, Martin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> On 26. Jan 2018, at 19:31, carlo von lynX <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Martin, we are the minority of people who accepted >> the gnu on the web... > You have anything to back that claim? > >> maybe we want to extend our >> audience to the people that think that such a home- >> grown logo doesn't stand for professionality? > Please put both logos next to each other and reconsider this statement. > Of course, this is also a matter of taste and I really do not want to argue > about this at all... but (hah!): > The current GNUnet logo is ok. Not great, but ok. It could definitively be > improved. > To to so we would need a professional designer (and I really mean that. > Professional. Not as in paid, but in being a professional designer). > Just as I probably would not want a professional designer to code in GNUnet > (unless also a professional coder) I would not want a coder to create the > logos. I do not know who created the current logo but considering our limited > resources in this regard it is actually quite good. > >> Same >> goes for the terrible Taler logo? Let Amirouche' >> creativity go wild, it is going in a totally useful >> direction! > Afaik the Taler logo already gets an update (and I really like the new one, > hope I am not spoilering things..). > Just by looking at it I am pretty sure it was done professionally. > Now, this does not mean that amirouche cannot create the logos. Or anybody > else for that matter. > Feel free. But doing this stuff is not trivial. I envy people who can create > beautiful icons/brand logos. > Who created the Guix logo btw? It looks really nice. > > @Amirouche: Please do not take this the wrong way. Keep up the work and go > create ;) > >> >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 06:46:14PM +0100, t3sserakt wrote: >>> By the way, is it a stupid idea to let the endpoint of >>> a cadet path be not the endpoint of user communication, >>> to protect meta data? Maybe this is easier to accomplish >>> than onion routing, or an additional protection together >>> with OR. >> >> That is actually the simple way to implement OR, >> just make CADET connections between the relays >> and therefore obfuscate the final endpoints. >> The reason we don't do that yet is because we >> don't have a strategy to decide which relays are >> trustworthy - or maybe, if rps is functional, we >> now have one. >> >> >> -- >> E-mail is public! Talk to me in private using encryption: >> http://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/LynX/ >> irc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion:67/lynX >> https://psyced.org:34443/LynX/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GNUnet-developers mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers > > _______________________________________________ > GNUnet-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
