<mark_weaver>I didn't say "it'll never break". The point is, any problem would be fixed fairly soon, because freenode is friendly with GNU and so ultimately any problem would get fixed in due time. and we have no commitments to maintaining complete uptime and quick response to issues on this IRC channel. That's not our job. We're all volunteers here.
<mark_weaver>handheldCar: look in gnu/packages/*.scm within the guix source code.
<mst>mark_weaver: yes. and freenode is also all volunteers, and if the failure mode I'm describing occurs then a significant amount of fucking about will be required by the staff
<mark_weaver>mst: I'd like to understand what you're suggesting exactly regarding "minimally responsible" "channel setup". Your failure mode was that civodul's account "dies". Are you suggesting that in that case, civodul should simply abandon that account and make a new one with a different name, so to not waste the time of the freenode ops?
<jmd> FWIW I agree that if a channel is logged, particularly if it is publically logged, then the /topic should say so.
<mark_weaver>okay. well, I guess what's probably going to happen is that the public logging will go away completely, and a few of us will just operate private loggers instead.
<mark_weaver>and then we can all feel comfortable in the naive belief that no logs are being kept.
<mark_weaver>Personally, I don't see how anyone can have an expectation of privacy on a well-publicized IRC channel that's open to all.
<jmd>That is true. But a short statement in the /topic "This channel is logged" costs nothing, and seems like the polite thing to do.
<mark_weaver>well, fair enough. but the effect will be that the currently semi-private logs (in the sense that most people don't know about them) will become more widely known, and then we'll probably just have to shut them down.
<mark_weaver>and I could immediately see that this was the likely outcome, which is why I've been less than enthusiastic about the idea. but I guess it's too late for that now.
<mark_weaver>so we'll go from "everyone has access to these logs" to "only a few select people, plus several intelligence agencies have access to the logs". not sure if that's an improvement.
<mark_weaver>and fwiw, I'm a big believer in protecting personal privacy, and I've put a lot of effort into that. I just don't think a public IRC channel open to all is a place to expect privacy.
<jmd>I agree. That is why I don't like channels which say "logging prohibited".
<mark_weaver>(I worked closely with Phil Zimmermann as the second full-time programmer hired at PGP, Inc)
<mark_weaver>I think it's reasonable for a small group of people to have a private conversation amongst themselves, and while I would probably use Jabber/XMPP for that, a lot of people are accustomed to IRC.
<mst>mark_weaver: several of the failure modes I've seen would involve that account no longer existing afterwards. which would also mean that this channel registration wouldn't exist, and would revert to freenode staff - at which point you'd have a significant amount of paperwork involved to get it back, or you'd need to abandon it
<mst>mark_weaver: what I'm suggesting is having more than one person with root access so if one of them loses his private key we don't have to make the hosting company break into the system for us, basically
<mst>mark_weaver: of course, if this channel was under the aegis of the GNU project presence on freenode the GNU group contact could sort things out - but it isn't, it would be called #gnu-guix in that case; being called #guix means it's explicitly independent of freenode's existing relationship with GNU
<mst>mark_weaver: I'll happily explain this further -if- you're actually intending to help me fix this stuff; if not, I'd rather wantil civodul is available and speak to him directly