import key failure, apparent bug

[Robert J. Hansen]

> A few more hours with AI reveals more bugs...

I think I see where much of the problem lies: you seem to think that 
Andrew and I are LLMs, and that by just insisting we are wrong we'll 
immediately tell you that of course we screwed that up and you're right 
to bring this to our attention.

This is of course bollocks, and for that reason I won't belabor it further.

In philosophy they like to talk about "category error," by which they 
mean to have so completely misunderstood a subject that there is no 
point in even holding discourse until the fundamental misunderstanding 
is corrected.

If President Roosevelt's reaction to Japanese naval aviation bombing the 
U.S. at Pearl Harbor was to say "this is horrific, the scourge of naval 
aviation must be ended, immediately scuttle all our aircraft carriers 
with their planes on them!", he would be suffering category error: he 
would have so completely misunderstood things that any and all 
discussion would be pointless until it was corrected.

That's where you are right now. It stings to be told "you've so 
completely misunderstood things there's no point in talking to you," but 
that's where we are. I'm sorry.

Specifically:

* You are glorifying the days of PGP 1. PGP 1 was a professional 
embarrassment to Phil Z, as he himself has said. PGP did not reach any 
state worth using until PGP 2.6, and even then there were problems.

* PGP 2.6 is not more reliable than GnuPG 2.5. PGP 2.6 was written in 
1992. We know vastly more now about writing security-critical code than 
we did back then.

* The use of software libraries does not mean software is unreliable, 
buggy, or insecure.

* The RFCs defining OpenPGP (RFC2440, 4880, 4880bis, and 9580) are not 
just trustworthy: they are defining. The same can be said of the 
LibrePGP specification. To disagree with the plain text of the RFC is 
rather like disagreeing with the number pi and saying it's actually 22/7 
on the nose and you won't put up with this entire "ratio of a circle's 
perimeter to its diameter" nonsense.

* You think that being rude to people who are helpfully providing you 
with correct information is somehow acceptable.

If you're willing to confront these five different things you have 
gotten fundamentally wrong, further discussion might be fruitful.

If you're not, I'm going to respectfully suggest you be given the boot, 
in order to keep this community one we all want to be part of.

Please choose wisely.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 236 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/attachments/20260601/2743b100/attachment-0001.sig>