On 4 June 2014 20:19, David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Herbert Snorrason <odin@anarchism.is> > wrote: > >> >> > There's IMO *no point whatsoever* "reinventing" OpenID or try >> > competing with OpenID. >> Then we disagree on a pretty fundamental level. OpenID is not >> acceptable, nor is any protocol which grants the identity provider the >> same level of surveillance capability over its users. A combination of >> an identity scheme that allows identity providers to monitor everything >> and an oligopoly in identities effectively controlled by US-based >> corporations (which is the status quo) is especially worrisome to me. >> What happens when the U.S. government goes on one of its quasi-regular > > > I read that as "Herbert Snorrason considers an end-user-managed asymmetric > cryptography option for identity authentication a non-negotiable acceptance > criterion." > > > > How do you think Herbert Snorrason's opinion stack up to Tim Berners-Lee's, in your view? Is any one more important than the other's, I would be interested to learn.
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 23:31:26 UTC