[LAD] [OT] Richard Stallman warns against ChromeOS
ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Wed Dec 15 15:02:08 UTC 2010
On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 05:14 -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 15, 2010 05:01:58 am Tim E. Real did opine:
> > On December 14, 2010 10:04:10 pm Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 02:47 +0000, Harry Van Haaren wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> > > >
> > > > <ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net> wrote:
> > > > A lot of people do, but perhaps they do it for mails that
> > > > anyway are in
> > > > public, e.g. to correspond to mailing lists.
> > > >
> > > > Anybody know of a public email provider that is better? Or more so:
> > > > that can prove they are better?
> > > > Open to suggestions :-)
> > > >
> > > > -Harry
> > >
> > > An evasive answer: For a while I used OpenPGP for emails ;). Perhaps
> > > all autistics and savants able to do prime factorization are only
> > > working for Google and no other provider or even intelligence
> > > services :D.
> > Ha. Good one.
> > But really, should we all be using some form of it?
> > I did for a while. I notice some folks here use it, some don't.
> > KMail always says unknown (I think we have to share keys).
> > Would it be better for LAD? Does it matter?
> > Will it, soon, the way things are going?
> > Big brother is the corporations.
> > I used to be able to claim a prize in a bag of potato chips by walking
> > in to any store and handing over a ticket. Now I must 'register'
> > on-line.
> > This technology we use is a delicate dance between convenience and
> > security, but I don't like what I'm seeing transpire these days...
> > Here, our gov created a national "do not call" list, which we could join
> > and telemarketers would not be allowed to call us, if we said so.
> > People flocked to the list!
> > Then the gov sold the list to some marketing group. Ugh...
> > Tim.
> Ralf I suspect, if he were to use pgp, would be like me, and only trust
> pgp-2.6.2a, the last one before they put Zimmerman in jail for a few years.
> I have often said, and have been called the uber paranoid for it, that one
> of the conditions of his release was that the next generation of pgp had a
> back door. Denials out the yang are always instantaneous, but none of them
> came from Pete, so I have no choice but to conclude he is under NDA as the
> price of his freedom. So I figure the lack of compatibility of modern
> versions means I might as well use plain text anyway. My views aren't
> secret anyway if you read my sig.
Hi Gene :)
*chuckle* I wrote Tim off-list, because I thought it became OT for the
OT thread. This reminds me, that I need to reply to some mails off-list
to you too, sorry, I've got issues with antihypertensive drugs and less
time at the moment and by the way, the side effects did effect my
psyche, anyway, I didn't notice to be paranoid ;D, perhaps this will
change, when reading more posts for this thread.
Is it proved that there is a back door for versions ex 2.6.2a?
More information about the Linux-audio-dev