[throwaway654329]

You said this up thread and I find it incorrect:

> If you RTFA you'd know it pertains to bribery, not coercion

By quoting the article it seems the text directly contradicts your summary as being too narrow. General coercion is also be included as part of the concerns raised by TFA. He isn’t just talking about NSA giving a person a sack of money.

Meanwhile in this thread and on Twitter, many people are indeed doing the things you say that nobody is doing.

We almost all use Bernstein’s crypto — some as mere users, others as developers, etc. I’m not sure what that brings to the discussion.

I’m glad we agree that his work to gather more information is a public good.

[dcow]

The article discusses it generally but uses bribery as the example. Perhaps that’s the confusion. Someone said the idea that we’re gonna find bribes is silly. Someone else said that’s insane, how could you not imagine the govt doing something coercive. Reply was that’s not what I said. Another challenge follows asserting that the gov’t is generally shady and coercive. I tried to clarify what I see as the confusion (bribery vs coercion as an example used in the article). Sorry if my statement was overly broad, my intention was to say we’re probably mostly on the same side and arguing over semantics. Maybe not all of the world is (e.g. Twitter), but it seemed like the case here. Maybe not and tptacek believes the gov’t is infallible. IDK. I like DJB and appreciate what he’s doing.