Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I am doing a double-take as well.

It seems like closed-source is antithesis to "designed for the every day person who really values their online security and privacy."




I think the key word there is 'every day person', which for most non-technical people means that they trust someone has looked after the problem, and may actually feel safer by paying someone to do so.


Oh there's no problem paying somebody to do a job. But somehow you'll need to be able to check that the job is done. Or at least read the opinion of somebody who has no stake in the matter to attest to the job being done.

So "the job" here involving making a browser not do things, which you can't see. How often pray tell do you pay somebody to perform a job you can't verify the outcome of, but take him by his word that he did it?


The placebo effect does not really apply to software, though.


How can you be so sure?


At least for one, it is so much easier to break the placebo.


Unfortunately the aforementioned persons are unlikely to realize they could pay someone to look after security in an open, communicative fashion.


How? Seems to me like an "every day person" wouldn't dive into the source code of their browser.


they would not, but the "many eyes" effect would benefit them nevertheless




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

Search: