We’ve had enough of digital monopolies and surveillance capitalism. We want an alternative world that works for everyone, just like the original intention of the web and net.

We seek a world of open platforms and protocols with real choices of applications and services for people. We care about privacy, transparency and autonomy. Our tools and organisations should fundamentally be accountable and resilient.


Eric Mill [LibreList] Re: [redecentralize] Spring of User Experience 2014-02-28 12:31:08 (7 years 1 mon 12 days 03:33:00 ago)
I get your point, but secure products which don't succeed at marketing are *not* "just as dangerous". Insecure but well-marketed projects are clearly more dangerous, as people put unfounded trust in them.

My main problem with the Tox team is that they said pretty much this: they'll improve security if it means not sacrificing UX. Viewing security and UX as equally important is a recipe for disaster, at users' expense.

It's natural to view them as in tension, but watching Moxie's work at Whispersystems has been an inspiring demonstration of why they don't have to be. WhisperSystems is now transparently integrated in CyanogenMod as the default SMS provider without any UX degradation, and they just moved beyond SMS to a more full-featured messaging system.

And unlike Telegram, they're doing it all as 100% open source, and even experimenting with ways of incentivizing and crowdfunding contributions.

So when I hear projects pit UX in tension with security, I hear that they don't feel like learning as much as Whispersystems has, or spending the time that they do on getting it Right.

-- Eric

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Francis Irving <francis@flourish.org> wrote:
As a warning, you've got to be careful the other way...

*Just* as dangerous are cryptographically excellent products which are
hard to use and aren't marketed, therefore have no adoption.

I agree we need things which are BOTH technically sound AND have a
great user experience.


On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 09:48:38AM -0500, Eric Mill wrote:
> Not to drag this out, but would you mind posting a link to something about
> Telegram's travails? I'm interested.
> There's the potential for a dangerous wave of slickly designed messaging
> apps that adopt the mantle of security without truly prioritizing it. I had
> a frustrating interaction with the Tox team here, for example:
> https://github.com/irungentoo/ProjectTox-Core/issues/121
> -- Eric
> On Feb 28, 2014 6:51 AM, "Ximin Luo" <infinity0@pwned.gg> wrote:
> > On 27/02/14 20:20, Francis Irving wrote:
> > > Hi all!
> > >
> > > Having interviewed many geeks, I now think the limiting factor in mass
> > adoption is involvement of more design and user experience people in
> > decentralization projects.
> > >
> > > As I describe in the Gigaom article today, I also think designers are
> > quite interested in this (post Snowden), and likely there are some who need
> > good projects to help/start but don't know about this movement.
> > >
> > > We are going to try and interview more people with that kind of
> > background, who have done at least something tangible in this area.
> > >
> > > Ideas I have:
> > > Telegram - who does design stuff there?
> >
> > For the love of god please do not give Telegram any more attention.
> >
> > They are a marketing machine with no security credentials whatsoever.
> >
> > They are so far up their own ass they are like a 3D projection of a klein
> > bottle.
> >
> > They ate a crap load of humble cake, perhaps it will be worth talking to
> > them in a year or so. But not now. Give more deserving projects your
> > attention for the time being.
> >
> > X
> >
> > --
> > GPG: 4096R/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE
> > git://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
> >
> >

Do *you* have an awesome idea you never quite manage to do?