>TextSecure folks: instead of ranting that “our stuff exists already, but we got no money and we got no cross-platform support Y U NO USE our protocol?” and using political tricks, go make better protocol and market yourself better.
As DanBC posted[1] in the other thread:
>>You seem to be mistaken about why they do this. It's nothing to do with pushing their app or their approach. They'd welcome good well-formed apps to compete with them. But when they see an app that claims to be secure they have an ethical duty to let people know if it is obviously not secure.
>>Most people are not bashing just for the sake of bashing. Some people need good cryptography software to avoid imprisonment, or torture, or state-killing. This isn't about stopping someone's teen-angsty poetry from being discovered by a sibling, it's about protecting political dissidents from an oppressive regime. In that context pointing out that a software is broken is not mindless bashing, it is a crucial part of the cryptography process.
>Go make your own stuff and don’t listen to HN or any other skeptical community.
Unproven cryptographic systems masquerading as secure need to be criticized. It is very, very dangerous when non-crypto people pretend to be crypto people and call their systems secure.
So, you don't think that just enough people down-voted this bullshit thread? Maybe you are the one wrong on that topic. Maybe you should do your homework.
As DanBC posted[1] in the other thread:
>>You seem to be mistaken about why they do this. It's nothing to do with pushing their app or their approach. They'd welcome good well-formed apps to compete with them. But when they see an app that claims to be secure they have an ethical duty to let people know if it is obviously not secure.
>>Most people are not bashing just for the sake of bashing. Some people need good cryptography software to avoid imprisonment, or torture, or state-killing. This isn't about stopping someone's teen-angsty poetry from being discovered by a sibling, it's about protecting political dissidents from an oppressive regime. In that context pointing out that a software is broken is not mindless bashing, it is a crucial part of the cryptography process.
>Go make your own stuff and don’t listen to HN or any other skeptical community.
Unproven cryptographic systems masquerading as secure need to be criticized. It is very, very dangerous when non-crypto people pretend to be crypto people and call their systems secure.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6949842