[liberationtech] issilentcircleopensourceyet.com

[Ali-Reza Anghaie]

I read them before - I followed the thread before. I too have written that
Silent Circle needs to follow-through on their promises. I also highlighted
some of the challenges of being a commercial entity in this space.

I wasn't being aggressive - hardly.

I'm disillusioned with the state of hacktivism when it's continuing to
force people to "come to us" instead of making it out to the people. I
meant what I said - I have a deep concern we're moving the discussion
further and further into the domain of the "haves".

And I ask about agenda because even when RedPhone and TextSecure were in
the exact, if not worse, boat - where were the domains and nits? I'm not
asking you as in ~you~ are the gamekeeper for all that - it's just a
dynamic in the community as a whole that's less than admirable. Or the far
more dangerous and opaque solutions than SC that exist that haven't gotten
a peep as much criticism at the same level-scale (of course they hit the WL
circle).

It's going full circle to are we helping or hurting the availability of
solutions when the default position is absolute disregard for any history
or written intent. At all. "If it's not ideal and idealistic - it's just
not worth using".. ??

*shrug* I appreciate your answer - it's crisp at least. -Ali



On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Nadim Kobeissi <nadim at nadim.cc> wrote:

> Hi Ali,
> There is no "agenda," and there needn't be one if you are to critique
> security software. No need to be so aggressive.
> My qualms against Silent Circle are detailed here:
> http://log.nadim.cc/?p=89
>
>
> NK
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Ali-Reza Anghaie <ali at packetknife.com>wrote:
>
>> Seriously - what's your agenda?
>>
>> Where are the domains for the other tens of providers who charge arms and
>> legs based on closed protocols even?
>>
>> What's the nit with Silent Circle specifically? Because they're
>> accessible? Because it's easier to use? Because the founders have good
>> track records of standing up to Government too?
>>
>> Being absolutist about everything isn't helping anyone who ~needs~ it -
>> it's a privilege of the "haves" that we can have these conversations over
>> and over again.
>>
>> Shouldn't we have taken the "fight" to carriers, Apple iOS T&Cs, etc.
>> harder and longer ago? And why do we keep expecting private entities to
>> fight our Government battles for us? It's a losing proposition and
>> increases the costs-per-individual to untenable levels when we mix
>> absolutely all their enterprise with civil liberty issues.
>>
>> There has got to be a better way than this ridiculous trolling and
>> bickering. Someone? Anyone?
>>
>> Again, seriously, what's the agenda against Silent Circle specifically?
>>
>> -Ali
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Nadim Kobeissi <nadim at nadim.cc> wrote:
>>
>>> http://issilentcircleopensourceyet.com/
>>>
>>> NK
>>>
>>> --
>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20121106/89653ce4/attachment.html>