It's time for PGP to die.

[Peter Lebbing]

On 17/08/14 23:14, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> But let's be real careful about thinking we are in any way better
> than other people.  We're not.

I completely agree with that statement but never read any disrespect in
the mail you are replying to. It /can/ be read that way, I agree. So it
might be good to point it out, as you did.

> If a new email cryptography standard comes out that's significantly 
> better than GnuPG, do you think Werner is going to sit around
> drinking Tanqueray straight out of the bottle because nobody's using
> GnuPG anymore?  I don't.  I think he'll cheerfully send GnuPG off
> into maintenance, applaud the new standard, and volunteer to help
> with a free implementation of the new standard.
> 
> [...]
> 
> When (not if) GnuPG dies out, the only question will be, "is this on 
> balance good for people?"  If so, then let's be thankful GnuPG
> existed, celebrate its passing, and cheerfully move on.

Thank you for that! It was something that bothered me about the blog
post. If the writer then and there came with a great new successor to
OpenPGP and put the title "OpenPGP needs to die" above his article that
then goes on "... because here is my killer application", then I would
congratulate him.

Now it's nothing but hot air. OpenPGP doesn't need to die; who is it
bothering by merely existing? What has OpenPGP ever done to him? Present
large blocks of base64 at the bottom of a mail? :)

Something better needs to live. That's the opposite of what he is
saying. What a negative Nancy.

-- 
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>