On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Jacob Appelbaum <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's interesting because one outcome seems to be that almost everyone > agrees that plaintext should not be considered reasonable. That's a > great outcome so far - I remember a time when people felt that it was > fine, most of the time, to have unencrypted communications as the norm. > > I look forward to the day when those same people start to get the big > picture on general social graph style traffic analysis. > I don't think it's they don't get it - once explained to even the most jaded they accept the expertise - it's that in the time period with immediate windows of opportunity present people are looking for a usable solution for ~their~ definition of usable (not "ours"). And they want it ~now~ on systems they actually have access to. That's their acceptable risk standard even if we entirely disagree. Breaking that dynamic isn't something you or I can fix per se. Is it? -Ali
_______________________________________________ liberationtech mailing list [email protected] Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click "yes" (once you click above) next to "would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest?" You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
