[strogonoff]

I type domain names sometimes, but generally I estimate 99% of people tap a link 99%+ of the time.

> Yeah and you don’t really need end-to-end encryption

I didn’t say you don’t need privacy, you are putting words in my mouth.

> Ah, that old chestnut!

The real chestnut are people who think the only way to go is to abolish institutions, grab a piece of land and guard it with shotguns and rocket launchers. A quick thought experiment would show that this is a dead end.

[EGreg]

Many of the same mindsets and people who deride blockchain as “you dont need it if you are not doing anything bad” are also going to do away with end-to-end encryption under the slogan “you don’t need it if you have nothing to hide”.

After all, it can be used to hide ANYTHING, including 2 billion dollar transfers, tax evasion, money laundering and of course supporting terrorism. At least the blockchain is public! The sentiment you express comes on one side of the freedom/security spectrum.

If you’re arguing in good faith, then you’ll have to think deeply why oppose blockchain but others shouldnt oppose end to end encryption for the same reasons of “nothing to hide”. Even I come down on the side of “if you are reduced to sneaking around, then your society is already in bad shape” and consider end-to-end encryption to be a bandaid that makes people complacent. But the war on end-to-end encryption is actually far more prevalent than that around the world, and far bigger than your silly war on blockchains and mere cryptographic signatures (which governments don’t oppose nearly as much):

https://community.qbix.com/t/the-coming-war-on-end-to-end-en...

Read it! And no, the strawman is that I’m talking about shotguns. I’m talking about open software and protocols eating the world if capitalistic for-profit corporations, just as they disrupted the Big Telcos, and then AOL/MSN etc. So will blockchain be the value layer and IPFS/Autonomi be the storage layer etc. And the Web will be increasingly outdated.

[strogonoff]

End-to-end encryption can actually facilitate privacy. Blockchain is at best orthogonal to privacy, a public ledger generally undermines it.

As an aside, I don’t really get how a domain name connects to privacy. When I use encryption (including HTTPS) to communicate, the goal is to stay hidden and unknown. When I set up a domain name for my business, the goal is directly the opposite. Not to say there can be no reasons to advertise while remaining anonymous, just not sure privacy is a great parallel to draw.

[EGreg]

Come on, more strawmen? First talking about shotguns, now privacy.

I didn't talk about facilitating privacy. You brought this up, in order to switch the subject to something end-to-end encryption can facilitate.

Blockchain isn't about privacy, it's about making sure that no one can control or man-in-the-middle-attack the network. People don't have to trust the middleman anymore.

[strogonoff]

You started talking about privacy by strawmaning with end-to-end encryption in your “chestnut” comment. Then you somehow brought in blockchain.

All of this is irrelevant or orthogonal to brand recognition.

[EGreg]

I wasn’t talking about privacy at all. I was saying that your approach of “you have nothing to worry about if you arent doing anything wrong” is not very great, and it is exactly what is used by governments to fight against something you probably like more than blockchain and consider necessary, even though it can be used to facilitate terrorism. So you should take a look at whether you have double standards with regard to things you dont like vs things you like and think we need.