what is killing PKI?

Charly Avital shavital at gmail.com
Sat Aug 25 19:41:22 CEST 2012

Stan Tobias <5038e22c.l1TW2+7SAAn+vaPC%sttob at mailshack.com> August 25,
2012 1:22:47 PM wrote:
> As this thread is turning into a general discussion on privacy and
> encryption, I would like just to add one more to the garden of thoughts.
> I'm not making any argument for or against, I just want to say some people
> find (forced) privacy detrimental, especially in a broad social context.

Why forced?
Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.
You want to use encryption, use it.
You don't want to use it, don't.

> Some time ago, reading a discussion I noticed this particular
> argument against encrypting file-sharing traffic, which can be
> summarized/paraphrased as:
>   "We don't want encryption, we want file-sharing be legal."
> It's a strong political statement.  While privacy is important, you
> don't win anything if you *have to* hide.  Freedom is often fought for
> by asserting your rights.

Nobody has to hide, this is not about hiding.
A fortiori, when one sends or receives an encrypted message, the mere
format of such a communication hollers loud and clear that the user is
protecting his/her communications, not hiding.
Freedom is freedom to think freely; and to act freely within the rules
of law.
If one finds the law questionable, there are constitutional and
democratic means to express and ask for revision or change of the law.

> This.  I wonder how certain societies got convinced that just being
> nude - the most natural, beautiful and human thing - was indecent
> and/or illegal.  Surely not because everyone was dressed?  Or?

Or who knows?

This is my first and last contribution to this thread.
You all have a fine week end.

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list