@Mikoto you also block people for thinking that allowing your messages to be leaked defeats the point of e2e lmao
Mikoto whyyyy
Mikoto whyyyy
@mewmew
> allowing your messages to be leaked defeats the point of e2e
Wat? I agree with that. That thread was about deniability.
The reason that I blocked you was a combination of stuff
1: I do not enjoy being subposted (had happened a few times before that thread).
2: I do not like hypocrites, you asked once someone who blocks you via EO why they block you but when I asked you to do the same via busshi you said that you do not want to. In the same spirit you are quick to disagree/discuss/point out how much of an idiot/asshole someone is (which is fine) as long as they are not your pals.
3: In that thread it was like I was arguing with a rock. I made long replies trying to explore the technical details of why I had a particular opinion and received replies like "nah", I do not enjoy wasting my time trying to educate people who are not interested. If you had said at the start "this discussion bores me" I would not bother you.
4: I also do not like people who pretend to know everything when they are clueless.
5: In general all discussions with you are like trying to squeeze water from a rock, one has to make multiple posts in order to get any useful info out of you. For example
me: "hey, can you tell me what X says?"
you: "nah"
me: "huh? did something happen?"
you: "no"
me: "why then?"
you: "because I am on static fe"
> allowing your messages to be leaked defeats the point of e2e
Wat? I agree with that. That thread was about deniability.
The reason that I blocked you was a combination of stuff
1: I do not enjoy being subposted (had happened a few times before that thread).
2: I do not like hypocrites, you asked once someone who blocks you via EO why they block you but when I asked you to do the same via busshi you said that you do not want to. In the same spirit you are quick to disagree/discuss/point out how much of an idiot/asshole someone is (which is fine) as long as they are not your pals.
3: In that thread it was like I was arguing with a rock. I made long replies trying to explore the technical details of why I had a particular opinion and received replies like "nah", I do not enjoy wasting my time trying to educate people who are not interested. If you had said at the start "this discussion bores me" I would not bother you.
4: I also do not like people who pretend to know everything when they are clueless.
5: In general all discussions with you are like trying to squeeze water from a rock, one has to make multiple posts in order to get any useful info out of you. For example
me: "hey, can you tell me what X says?"
you: "nah"
me: "huh? did something happen?"
you: "no"
me: "why then?"
you: "because I am on static fe"
@Mikoto lmao ok.
I don't remember subposting you. You're really autistic about this tho (and this is coming from me, incredibly autistic). You just have to deal with it.
> you asked once someone who blocks you via EO why they block you but when I asked you to do the same via busshi you said that you do not want to. In the same spirit you are quick to disagree/discuss/point out how much of an idiot/asshole someone is (which is fine) as long as they are not your pals.
I have literally no idea what you are referring to here.
> In that thread it was like I was arguing with a rock. I made long replies trying to explore the technical details of why I had a particular opinion and received replies like "nah", I do not enjoy wasting my time trying to educate people who are not interested. If you had said at the start "this discussion bores me" I would not bother you.
Because it's not a technological issue! It's of use-cases. You can't technology-out a use-case. You don't care about deniability, I do - and you're the one not realizing that use-case. If you don't want that use-case, fine - but I don't see why someone explicitly wouldn't want deniability. It's a bonus feature. It's like complaining "I don't want my messages e2e".
> I also do not like people who pretend to know everything when they are clueless.
I don't do this.
And you should've known I used static-fe after I told you many times. I don't like creeping on people, or when you do it - take a hint.
I don't remember subposting you. You're really autistic about this tho (and this is coming from me, incredibly autistic). You just have to deal with it.
> you asked once someone who blocks you via EO why they block you but when I asked you to do the same via busshi you said that you do not want to. In the same spirit you are quick to disagree/discuss/point out how much of an idiot/asshole someone is (which is fine) as long as they are not your pals.
I have literally no idea what you are referring to here.
> In that thread it was like I was arguing with a rock. I made long replies trying to explore the technical details of why I had a particular opinion and received replies like "nah", I do not enjoy wasting my time trying to educate people who are not interested. If you had said at the start "this discussion bores me" I would not bother you.
Because it's not a technological issue! It's of use-cases. You can't technology-out a use-case. You don't care about deniability, I do - and you're the one not realizing that use-case. If you don't want that use-case, fine - but I don't see why someone explicitly wouldn't want deniability. It's a bonus feature. It's like complaining "I don't want my messages e2e".
> I also do not like people who pretend to know everything when they are clueless.
I don't do this.
And you should've known I used static-fe after I told you many times. I don't like creeping on people, or when you do it - take a hint.
@mewmew
> I don't remember subposting you
That's fine, you do not have to.
> I have literally no idea what you are referring to here.
That's fine, you do not have to.
> Because it's not a technological issue
It literally is. Anyway, this is not a justification for shitty replies like "nah", if you had a problem you could tell me at the time.
> You don't care about deniability
I still doubt that you know what deniability is. Based on my understanding so far you think that an unencrypted copy of the message is send to the server, or that the message is also encrypted with the server's key.
> and you're the one not realizing that use-case
I was never given a use-case.
> but I don't see why someone explicitly wouldn't want deniability
I literally explained in that thread.
> I used static-fe after I told you many times
That was the first time I heard it actually.
> I don't like creeping on people
Good for you.
> or when you do it - take a hint.
Not sure what this means.
Anyway you also blocked me from your princess.cat account so why are you even complaining?
> I don't remember subposting you
That's fine, you do not have to.
> I have literally no idea what you are referring to here.
That's fine, you do not have to.
> Because it's not a technological issue
It literally is. Anyway, this is not a justification for shitty replies like "nah", if you had a problem you could tell me at the time.
> You don't care about deniability
I still doubt that you know what deniability is. Based on my understanding so far you think that an unencrypted copy of the message is send to the server, or that the message is also encrypted with the server's key.
> and you're the one not realizing that use-case
I was never given a use-case.
> but I don't see why someone explicitly wouldn't want deniability
I literally explained in that thread.
> I used static-fe after I told you many times
That was the first time I heard it actually.
> I don't like creeping on people
Good for you.
> or when you do it - take a hint.
Not sure what this means.
Anyway you also blocked me from your princess.cat account so why are you even complaining?
@Mikoto I never blocked you.
> That was the first time I heard it actually.
Then that's a pretty bad example.
If I'm being evasive about doing something, it probably means I don't want to do it and don't feel like arguing.
I gave you my use case for deniability. It's the main reason I use e2e ffs.
> I still doubt that you know what deniability is. Based on my understanding so far you think that an unencrypted copy of the message is send to the server, or that the message is also encrypted with the server's key.
I'm sorry did you even read the thread? I know what deniability is. I've read the Mastodon implementation of encryption, the pull request, and your obnoxious descriptions of it too. Given what you've said, I'm not sure you know what it is.
You blocked me because you're too immature to lose an argument and because I was friends with someone who recognized you for the sperg you are
> That was the first time I heard it actually.
Then that's a pretty bad example.
If I'm being evasive about doing something, it probably means I don't want to do it and don't feel like arguing.
I gave you my use case for deniability. It's the main reason I use e2e ffs.
> I still doubt that you know what deniability is. Based on my understanding so far you think that an unencrypted copy of the message is send to the server, or that the message is also encrypted with the server's key.
I'm sorry did you even read the thread? I know what deniability is. I've read the Mastodon implementation of encryption, the pull request, and your obnoxious descriptions of it too. Given what you've said, I'm not sure you know what it is.
You blocked me because you're too immature to lose an argument and because I was friends with someone who recognized you for the sperg you are
@mewmew
> I never blocked you.
Bullshit, you did at my lbmo account.
> If I'm being evasive about doing something, it probably means I don't want to do it and don't feel like arguing.
And I hate people like that. If you have a problem say it, I can't read minds and you also know very well that I am an aspie.
> I gave you my use case for deniability
And I explained you why it is bullshit. You went on to ignore it with a "nah".
> I know what deniability is
Just like I know quantum mechanics.
> and your obnoxious descriptions of it too
heh
> You blocked me because you're too immature to lose an argument and because I was friends with someone who recognized you for the sperg you are
You can't imagine someone being upset over their post being ignored? I can't change your mind, that's fine.
Whatever, I do not see what the point of this is.
> I never blocked you.
Bullshit, you did at my lbmo account.
> If I'm being evasive about doing something, it probably means I don't want to do it and don't feel like arguing.
And I hate people like that. If you have a problem say it, I can't read minds and you also know very well that I am an aspie.
> I gave you my use case for deniability
And I explained you why it is bullshit. You went on to ignore it with a "nah".
> I know what deniability is
Just like I know quantum mechanics.
> and your obnoxious descriptions of it too
heh
> You blocked me because you're too immature to lose an argument and because I was friends with someone who recognized you for the sperg you are
You can't imagine someone being upset over their post being ignored? I can't change your mind, that's fine.
Whatever, I do not see what the point of this is.
@Mikoto I never blocked you at lbmo.
And sorry for being evasive. I can't read your mind either. After you told me not to, I tried to avoid it.
The main reason I care about deniability and e2e is so people can't prove what messages I sent them. That's the whole reason I use e2e. If you can prove it, it's pointless.
Obviously you could leak your own keys, but it should NOT be easier than that. I certainly don't want a protocol making it easier than that.
And sorry for being evasive. I can't read your mind either. After you told me not to, I tried to avoid it.
The main reason I care about deniability and e2e is so people can't prove what messages I sent them. That's the whole reason I use e2e. If you can prove it, it's pointless.
Obviously you could leak your own keys, but it should NOT be easier than that. I certainly don't want a protocol making it easier than that.
moved to @kumicota@bae.st
