Privacy: A Natural Right to Free Speech
Most organizations (e.g. technology, banks, governments)
track, persist, and use our behavior for their gain.
Centralized organizations are major targets for theft.
Closed source software can easily contain hidden back doors for
thieves to access our information without our knowledge and many open source
applications have closed source libraries embedded in them.
Smart phones, our primary means of global communication and
collaboration, are weak in maintaining our anonymity and privacy - critical
to ensuring individual freedom.
Many messaging applications exist but none have the means to ensure
our privacy is maintained.
Dgramz is a secure open-source decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application
running over the 1M5 privacy network
with end-to-end encryption by default requiring no
server connections protecting your communications and personal data from
unjust interception, theft, monitoring, and censorship yet isolating unethical actors.
A note on privacy.
Some wish to argue against private communications due to a few
aggressive behaviors, e.g. child abuse, terrorism, extortion.
These behaviors do not justify attempting to take away everyone's privacy.
People engaging in these poor behaviors can be found and brought to justice by others means.
Policing of poor behavior must be done within our communities,
not unethically through mass surveillance.
If it's not acceptable for us to have a government agent or identity thief by our side 24/7 to watch our every move and
hear every conversation with someone else, why should we feel it's ok when it's electronic?
Online privacy is no different than offline privacy.
No back-doors are placed in Dgramz as it would make it exploitable by anyone with the knowledge to do so
making it one more tool promising privacy yet failing to deliver.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
"When you abandon freedom to achieve security, you lose both and deserve neither."
"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide
is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."
"Nobody needs to justify why they 'need' a right. The burden of justification falls
on the one seeking to infringe upon the right. If one person chooses to disregard
their right to privacy, that doesn't automatically mean everyone should follow
suit, either. You can't give away the rights of others because they're not
useful to you. More simply, the majority cannot vote away the natural
rights of the minority."