undefined | Better HN

story

0 pointsvetinari5y ago0 comments

It is not FUD.

OWS was financed by Open Technology Fund, to the tune of almost $3M, during the years 2013-2016. See here: https://www.opentech.fund/results/supported-projects/open-wh...

What is Open Technology Fund? It is a program of Radio Free Asia, which run by US Agency for Global Media, funded by US Congress.

0 comments

eganist5y ago

Hey, advisor for a non-signal E2EE chat service here that also benefited from the Open Technology Fund.

I recognize that you'd basically just be taking my word for it, but literally all they did was take an application from us, approve it after doing their diligence, and paying Cure53 for an assessment. There was no other involvement or, as you're implying, interference.

Just my experience, but I'm publishing this because the fud breaks my heart. OTF does good work.

mahogany5y ago

In my experience, most people who project nefarious intentions on the government have no experience working with or within the government. The government, after all, is a big thing with no unified goals or intentions. But for some reason, for some people, 'government' always means 'bad'.

stjohnswarts5y ago

To be fair it usually is bad when it comes to matters of privacy and being open and honest about said privacy.

Forbo5y ago

Governments gave us things like GDPR and HIPAA.

vetinariOP5y ago

It could be, I believe what you say is very much the truth.

But that doesn't really matter. Even by doing that. these two are associated. Imagine, if there was a non-profit, that took money from some Kremlin or Fobidden City development program, using exactly the same procedure. Would be that non-profit trustworthy going forward, given their association?

So this one is the same, just with red and white stripes. Definitely not FUD, they did take money from US Gov agency.

eganist5y ago

> Would be that non-profit trustworthy going forward, given their association?

Kinda depends. If the money was authorized by a parliamentary body (with clear legal text around who's receiving funding, what the conditions are, etc), I wouldn't be so worried. If it was authorized by an executive as a disbursement from a random pot, I'd be more worried about strings.

Ergo my comfort with US congressional funding v. a DARPA grant or In-Q-Tel investment.

approxim8ion5y ago

>Would be that non-profit trustworthy going forward, given their association?

As long as the product is proprietary, no.

approxim8ion5y ago

That is not the point. The point is what does the funding get them? A backdoor? The algorithm as well as the client source are open for audit and have been audited multiple times.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

eganist5y ago

Hey, advisor for a non-signal E2EE chat service here that also benefited from the Open Technology Fund.

Just my experience, but I'm publishing this because the fud breaks my heart. OTF does good work.

mahogany5y ago

stjohnswarts5y ago

To be fair it usually is bad when it comes to matters of privacy and being open and honest about said privacy.

Forbo5y ago

Governments gave us things like GDPR and HIPAA.

vetinariOP5y ago

It could be, I believe what you say is very much the truth.

So this one is the same, just with red and white stripes. Definitely not FUD, they did take money from US Gov agency.

eganist5y ago

> Would be that non-profit trustworthy going forward, given their association?

Ergo my comfort with US congressional funding v. a DARPA grant or In-Q-Tel investment.

approxim8ion5y ago

>Would be that non-profit trustworthy going forward, given their association?

As long as the product is proprietary, no.

approxim8ion5y ago

That is not the point. The point is what does the funding get them? A backdoor? The algorithm as well as the client source are open for audit and have been audited multiple times.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse