- There is no demo, i can only guess that this is a "browser-based skype". I hate when i can't try it but it's free.
- Open-source, but no git repo?
Btw I had the same idea before (I posted it to an Idea Sunday thread) but I dropped the idea because i realized that no one needs this level of security, NSA is not interested in your chat with family and friends...
"Open-source, but no git repo" -- Open-source does not always entail git or Github.
"I dropped the idea because i realized that no one needs this level of security, NSA is not interested in your chat with family and friends..." -- I'm glad you dropped the idea because someone who doesn't understand why privacy is important shouldn't be making privacy applications. The NSA doesn't care about your chat with family and friends, until suddenly they DO start caring and everything you've said can be manipulated and transformed against you, whether your conversations were innocent or not.
Also as I understood, you don't have Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Googe, Outlook, YouTube, and even HN account because NSA could one day transform everything against you?!
Well, the NSA gave them a tip.
Now imagine you're running for public office and your opponents will pay top dollar for dirt on you. Imagine that one day you're at odds with your government and they'll use every piece of information they can to prosecute you.
Privacy from one's government and those who control/buy into it is something that nobody needs until they do.
That doesn't mean you can't have a public life as well. But why give out more than you need to?
Perhaps, a better scenario is that you are chatting with a fellow entrepreneur about bitcoin, a short while later they are charged by the IRS for tax evasion. Meanwhile, your conversation with them on the subject is discovered through the NSA machinery and is used to kick off an investigation against you.
I wish I had a better example, as that would serve us well to educate folks on the value of privacy. I'm writing in part that someone has a better example to share.
When not citing technology-focused issues, I like to use the bathroom example: "Would you use a public bathroom with glass walls?" It illustrates the difference between covering up wrongdoing and need for personal privacy, two entirely different things.
The idea of having a secure communication channel doesn't mean that ALL your communications have to be over secure channels, that would be ridiculous. Having the option to bank on a secure channel for conversations you deem private is a perfectly reasonable compromise. People in government agencies switch between insecure and secure mediums regularly.
Having a FB/Twitter/Skype/HN account just means that I am willing to make a tradeoff of privacy to use these services, one that I am okay with. This does not completely exclude me from occasionally using a secure medium, right?