Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think the point is that it's not stop-gap in that process, it's step one.

If the opponents of the change you propose have access to your private data, they have an unfair advantage.



Rather than encrypting 'our' data, we could also strive to make 'their' data as accessible to us as our's is to them. Aka transparency.


I think that's a failing strategy. You can only trust that 'their' data is open as much as you trust 'them'.

This is the robustness principle (for API design/use ) applied. "Be lenient in what you accept from others, stringent in what you emit."

As applied to this case, it's "Be lenient in what you you expect reality is, but stringent in what you attempt to shift reality to."




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: