[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ESD-translators] Slides for workshop in Prague

From: Tomas Stary
Subject: Re: [ESD-translators] Slides for workshop in Prague
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 09:18:25 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0

Great, the understandable language is sometimes problematic for me.

On 04/04/2018 12:20 AM, Kateryna Razumova wrote:
> 2018-04-03 23:04 GMT+02:00 Tomas Stary <address@hidden>:
> I agree with all these points, but how they can be represented in
> terms of user experience? I will try to translate to understandable
> language.
>> 1. you might want to access encrypted emails on your phone
> "You can access your data anywhere on any device if you have a key"
Yes, provided that you have a compatible program for decryption.

The point is that you might already be using GPG on your laptop, but
perhaps you sometimes prefer to access it on the phone. It would be
inconvenient to have to get your laptop out any time when you want to
read encrypted email.

>> 2. GPG is simple and well tested technology
> It is hard to translate because though GPG is simple telegram/signal
> are simple too (much more simple from the user side).
> "The GPG technology is very reliable and easy to use"
> "Anyone can audit it and thousands of people already did it"
Perhaps simple is not the right term. What I meant is that it follow the
UNIX ideology, where each program does only one thing and does it well.
The result is then achieved by combining those elementary programs
together. Also it is easier to replace a particular element by an
alternative one.

The telegram/signal might be simple from programmers perspective, but I
guess there are not many people who understand their insides. Although
they are good as at least their client is free software (which
unfortunately cannot be said about the server-side).

Your translation sounds good :)

>> 3. signal and telegram are centralised technology, while GPG can be used
>> on any data and decentralised services like email, I would also like to
>> set it up for chat on XMPP. This is important, because it provides more
>> censorship resistence (telegram actually censors some groups [1]). (I
>> don't know what matrix is)
> The bad news is that most of users don't care about
> centralized/decentralized. It is more a technological term not a user
> experience one.
> I would translate these point like:
> "The technology is very reliable and independent from other layers
> (mail server provider, chat server)"
They might start caring if you explain them the drawback. Or if their
government starts blocking the service, which is much easier for
centralised service -- as some countries already did [2]


The translation sounds good :)
>> [1]
>> 4. you can use web-of-trust to assess validity of certificates
> "The technology allows you to identify and be identified"
> or
> "The technology allows you to verify identity of your partner (interlocutor)"
The second one sounds much better.
> I tried to make these points more understandable for people who far from IT.
> Yours truly,
> Kateryna Razumova.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]