-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Le 12-12-09 02:33 AM, [email protected] a écrit :
> I might agree that it is still a bad/useless/whatever feature although I'm 
> not sure how it is a
privacy issue if you solve the privacy problem. I don't like the feature
for various reasons. It isn't a feature for users. It's a feature to
drive revenue. That isn't a bad thing though. There isn't anything wrong
with making money off free software.

It's still a problem because it's implemented "their way".

Ask DropBox (or, well, the many banks and financial instritutions with
data breaches) how closed-source implementations of security worked for
them.

Even a free open source implementation of that policy can't be without
its flaws. The bottom line is when you have such a feature introduced
it's not a matter of if it will fail but when.

Making money comes in many different models. Pre-installing some opt-out
'maybe we'll get it right this way, you know, we're not perfect, sorry!'
feature is not how I see this going forward.

F.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: PGP/Mime available upon request
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlDEjl4ACgkQfUcTXFrypNW2kQCg3XalHSyRTGpGm3EAj6LqWFM6
dsYAoJA0DZm3YSdxNywBL+i0RnViqU+J
=FQuw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to