Conversation

Notices

1. MMN-o ✅⃠ (mmn@social.umeahackerspace.se)'s status on Thursday, 13-Apr-2017 16:33:01 UTC MMN-o ✅⃠

   • MMN-o ✅⃠
   • Pan💔‭
   @pan My issue with mixing public and private communication inside the same tool is that some day you're going to make a mistake (or as with Facebook, the definition of private gets redefined regularly). Better to use different tools for sensitive communication, those are my two fiddy.
   • Bob Mottram repeated this.
   • Bob Mottram (bob@social.freedombone.net)'s status on Thursday, 13-Apr-2017 16:57:46 UTC Bob Mottram

     in reply to

     • Pan💔‭
     @mmn @pan Even if the user is a deity who never makes mistakes, trying to shoehorn privacy onto a system which was never designed for it is only likely to result in a bad solution which gives a false sense of security.
   • Bob Mottram (bob@social.freedombone.net)'s status on Thursday, 13-Apr-2017 18:42:03 UTC Bob Mottram

     • Pan💔‭
     @pan @mmn for the record I'm not much of a reductionist. I'm no expert on PHP, but looking at the codebase of gnusocial it seems difficult to believe that this could be secured in a way which wasn't merely self-delusion. Perhaps it can be done, but would take a serious amount of work.
     
     I'm more hopeful about newer developments such as the backend of Pleroma.