what is killing PKI?
expires2012 at rocketmail.com
Mon Oct 8 01:55:41 CEST 2012
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Saturday 6 October 2012 at 10:20:53 PM, in
<mid:5070A0B5.9020702 at sixdemonbag.org>, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Therefore, for this question to be meaningful, you must
> have doubt as to whether Werner & Co. are capable of
> forming an opinion as to what they consider to be "safe
> and sane."
I do not harbour any such doubt. I also don't see how they might be
suggested by my question , or by my rebuttal of your claim that it
was a meaningless question because it wrongly presumed there's a
single objective standard for what is "safe and sane" .
 "And what's wrong with having safe and sane defaults for those
who choose not to make their own informed choices?"
 "I disagree. I would say it presumes that the person/people
releasing the software are capable of forming an opinion as to
what they consider to be 'safe and sane.'"
> Because if there's no doubt, then why ask it at all?
Because I believe my question outlines a valid alternative strategy to
the one outlined in your question , to which I was replying.
 "Instead of telling people what they should do, what's wrong with
giving people options and telling them that it's their
responsibility to make informed choices?"
MFPA mailto:expires2012 at rocketmail.com
None are so fond of secrets as those who do not mean to keep them
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-users