“People are arseholes. They’re just always gonna be that way.”

#norobot #noindex #NoAI

  • 6 Posts
  • 42 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 23rd, 2026

help-circle
  • How could something designed for human communication be so utterly cumbersome and confusing ?

    Several reasons, I guess?

    1. The PGP (later, OpenPGP) protocol.

    The proprietary PGP software, which was the initial implementation of the PGP protocol(s) also suffered from usability problems:

    2. GnuPG maintainers are implicitly using asymptotic software versioning

    Donald Knuth was probably the most notable proponent of the idea that software packages should increasingly tend toward stability, with fewer and fewer patches needed. He used explicitly asymptotic version numbering for TeX and Metafont.

    Some of the quotes in OP’s video make imply GnuPG’s maintainers are implicitly following a similar approach, e.g. the section about “Sequoia’s need for churn”.

    With encryption software, there is an especially strong argument for being conservative about changes. Patches may have unforeseen consequences, adding subtle vulnerabilities.

    However, the downside of this, as the gpg.fail team pointed out, is that it biases the GnuPG maintainers towards excessive rejection of patches. Especially patches that would improve usability. Arguably, TeX suffered from a similar bias; hence the development of LaTeX and newer TeX front-ends to improve usability.

    3. Changing the interface would be effortful

    Improving GnuPG’s interface would require quite a lot of work in itself, both to the codebase and the documentation.

    Releasing a version with those changes would also require fielding a lot of support queries for many years, because decades of software manuals all over the web were written for the traditional GnuPG interface, and aren’t going to be updated overnight. Some of those manuals will surely never get updated, because they are no longer maintained even though they are still online and still used.

    I can sympathise with the GnuPG maintainers for finding this daunting. But the improvements are needed. Thankfully, developers of tools like minisign, age, and sequoia are taking on much of this work; it’s just a pity that the work had to be done in this fragmented way through third-party efforts, instead of in GnuPG itself.





  • I don’t judge but I do get annoyed…

    Getting annoyed is a form of judgement.

    … at US defaultism

    Yes, U.S. defaultism is problematic.

    Still, as long as companies, especially US-based ones like Google, are exporting their US-centric products & practices, people outside the US will be exposed to products & practices shaped by US law.

    Because enforcement is rarely watertight, the above holds true even if the importing country’s laws forbid those products & practices.

    Therefore, unless you wish to live in ignorance, it’s worth being aware of the laws that most strongly shape the technologies that in turn shape your society - even laws from jurisdictions outside your own.




  • They might not know it.

    But they would, if anyone with your name & address ever:

    • Stored it on a Google server. (Maybe a business you once placed an order with uses GSuite?)
    • Made a Google/GMail Contacts/Address-book entry with that info. (Maybe you invited a friend or colleague for dinner?)
    • Made those details public (land registry, company officer registry, etc).
    • Etc.