-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hi
On Friday 2 May 2014 at 3:02:30 AM, in <mid:4947277.3iX2JyFA0M@inno>, Hauke Laging wrote: > Let's not try to protect the users against themselves > even in non- technical contexts. Why not? If they are determined, they will get around the safeguards anyway. If they were simply unwittingly going to do something potentially harmful, the safeguards were worth it. > Your opinion about > leaking social information is not better that that of > somebody who likes to leak it. But either of those two is better than somebody who leaks it without having considered all angles and formed an opinion, and without considering the interests of others who may be harmed by his leaking. > The result should not be > you making that impossible for him The leaking of personal and/or social information cannot be made impossible but it needs to be a deliberate choice. We should get as close as we can to making _accidental_ leaking impossible. > but quite simple: He leaks, you don't. It is nothing like a simple "He leaks, you don't" when he is leaking information relating to others as well as to himself. (More "He leaks, you don't - so you avoid him like the plague. Oops, he already leaked information about you before you found out he was leaky and started to avoid him.") - -- Best regards MFPA mailto:[email protected] Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iPQEAQEKAF4FAlNjtydXFIAAAAAALgAgaXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3Bl bnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEJBMjM5QjQ2ODFGMUVGOTUxOEU2QkQ0NjQ0 N0VDQTAzAAoJEKipC46tDG5pilwD/Ar41w1C7TiTI7iA6Sk4H4YCLirnYhNzS9S9 ZHptNWfstBu4mrbVROz7smF9oRzFz6cn610tNskLRPdZmnNoXlyxq340civTF/Rd fbu2yUxlVALmR5wwsBbG/rHVzFJV3WBAYgHBXdLOHgWTXr+Sid44s96Ms+3xIaEy 3UQLZcjT =pMPH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
