Re: [Social-discuss] Languages -- let's make a web application

[Ted Smith]

On Mon, 2010-03-29 at 08:04 -0400, Rob Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 06:29:37 +0200 (CEST), Carlo von Loesch
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Matt Lee typeth:
> > | This is also why I think something in a browser would be more
> > | understandable by a typical user.
> > 
> > A user also understands a Skype client or a bittorrent plugin.
> > Maybe he even understands a Jabber client.
> > 
> > The choice of tools is not limited by mental capacities yet.
> > The question is how much are you intending to through encryption,
> > thus privacy, out of the window.
> 
> We're not. 

Are you saying that as Rob Myers, individual, or as Rob Myers, Agent of
FooCorp?

If the latter, what has changed between now and:

On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 18:55 -0500, Matt Lee wrote:
> Should GNU social be a straight up replacement for existing social
> networks? I don't think so.
> 
> Should GNU social include the creation of a protocol for decentralized,
> encrypted communication between social networks? I think it should.
> 
> Not wishing to disappoint, but I think the idea of making a straight up
> clone of Facebook that is AGPL isn't what we should be thinking about
> here. We may decide to create a simple, Facebook-type UI as a demo for
> one of the possible applications of GNU social, but let's also consider
> the future and other ideas for social software.

It was my understanding since this message that GNU Social was to
demonstrate a commitment to privacy above and beyond what a facebook
clone would have. Has that changed? If so, how and why?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part