I agree. I’d even be willing to regularly donate to a foundation that would have this aim as their goal and have their acts matching their promises.
Although, not necessarily a new engine. Going from scratch is a good way to remake a lot of mistakes, while reusing old code is a good way to keep old debt. That’s not a decision I would like to have to take.
Which is probably why the decision was reverted.
It is possible to do, to some extent. Everything’s possible. But then, when people that are on both side of this encryption barrier wants to talk, then both must use unencrypted messages. You’d also have the obvious case of someone having a phone/device/account from country A temporarily crossing through country FuckingFranceOrUK, so what do you do in that case?
You’d need to implement that, add UI features to know if you’re using encryption or not, and above all, it’s fucking stupid and against what most sane messaging solutions wants to do.
I’m sure it’s possible to find people that would gladly do all that. Hopefully those people are not in the business of making all the useful communication services we currently use.
The law is enforceable. If the options you’re given is “put a backdoor in your product or stop operating in the country”, it’ll happen. And even if you reply “then I’ll go away”, laws like this, stupid, dangerous, breaking everything, will keep popping in one country after another until it’s too late.
It not making sense have no bearing on whether it can be enforced or not. And the mere existence of the law may be enough to later put you in hot water if you have some de-facto illegal software on your phone or computer, for example. It would not be automatic everywhere, but another tool to just legally have something against most people.
Yeah. Also we don’t have good guys either, but, that sounds nice.
It’s slowly turning, too. Start looking for something else.
Nice one. Counterpoint, it seems the person was fresh out of the restroom.
(I feel the need to say it, but I’m not actually that serious about sitting near a corpse for hours)
It’s basically the same, but the devil is in the detail. DRM disabled from the get go, which is a show stopper for some sites (say, netflix). Some sites will bork themselve on the strange user-agent. Some advanced privacy features are quite hard to disable willingly, which may or may not be a good thing if you actually have to get things done on sites that breaks.
One would argue that sites that breaks when privacy features are enforced are not worth it, but you don’t always have a choice in that regard.
In four hours and in a relatively cool room, with adequate ventilation, that’s not really a problem. It’s not like they picked a decomposing corpse before take off and stuffed it there.
Worst case scenario order a coffee and leave it on it.
The only acceptable privacy policy for a browser is “we won’t fucking look into anything, take anything, nor send anything anywhere you didn’t actually wish to send explicitly”.
Firefox have an extension system. If mozilla wants to bloat it, they should do it via extension, so that they’re not bloating the actually useful part. As it is, all they’re doing is forcing more work on people to manage forks to remove all the shit every time they push a release.
Rebranded, pre-cleaned of all the forced stuff from mozilla, with the built-in integration of more privacy-enhancing features.
So, not “just firefox, rebranded” at all.
No more fighting for the armrest, no snoring, no chit chat? Well…
You don’t need advanced scanning technology running on every device with access to every single bit of data you ever seen to detect scam. You need telco operator to stop forwarding forged messages headers and… that’s it. Cheap, efficient, zero risk related to invasion of privacy through a piece of software you did not need but was put there “for your own good”.