When a person arrives in a new country with only a passport and money, they can manage to live there. Dining at a restaurant requires money, not a passport. Staying at a hotel requires both money and a passport.
This serves as the starting point for how Keychat thinks about the online world: user-controlled IDs and wallets.
Replies (16)
Can we do better?
deep seek
gov listening to The People
Platforms pervert. Protocols purify.
I laughed WAY too hard at this
Yes I like Keychat's ability to monetize without depending on grants, but it's all for not if users can't protect themselves from a privacy perspective. SimpleX managed to work without requiring identity, which is why I asked this question.
Plz check this note.
View quoted note →Got it. The nuance is missing in the marketing material in SimpleX. Both have identity, but your identity system is ratcheted, just like the messages, allowing for forward secrecy of the identity too. Is that right?
Keychat distinguishes between the ID and the receiving/sending addresses. The ID remains unchanged, while the receiving and sending addresses are updated continuously. The ID does not appear on the envelope; only the addresses are displayed.
OK. So the ID is fixed, but the sending/receiving addresses are independently ratcheted (2 ratchets), and only the ratcheted addresses are exposed during transmit.
I'm so used to thinking of id's and addresses as the same because they are both identifiers. Here the identity is fixed and private while the addresses are ephemeral and public.
Staying in a hotel should not require government id any more than buying dinner does.
It should require any id at all, not just government id.
Simplex has anonymous identity not that different from a wallet address. Without at least that much anyone could impersonate anyone.
No this is the best version of this meme pure 😂
Is he wrong, tho?
