There's a certain sense to that. If it is effective for the worst of society who are constant targets, it will work for grandma. However that is assuming the technology can become user friendly/cheap.
No, there is no sense to that. The worst of society have a lot of tools that are effective for them, that your grandma has absolutely no use for. The worst of society will also put up with using some pretty weird things as long as they will help them break the law, that are incredibly awkward to use for anyone else.
My point was that if a solution was battle tested to withstand the scrutiny that the ne'er-do-wells encourage, then random person who knows nothing can feel comfortable that their use of the technology is also secure. It's kind of like calling something "military-grade". In addition I also qualified the statement to ensure that your second point was covered, that overhead could restrict it's use.
You actually hit the nail on the head there: It is a lot like calling something "military grade". Military grade is not something regular people want! Military grade is clunky, cumbersome and problematic for reasons that are a tradeoff for things that matter a lot to the military, but which are not an issue at all for regular people.
You don't want your car to be covered in heavy armour. That gains you nothing and costs you a lot. But the military does want that, a lot.
But let's do apples to apples here, because you are comparing "military grade" hardware and I'm talking about software, something where component costs are 0 and have 0 cost to duplicate.
But that's really secondary to the point, if something has proven itself in the most strenuous conditions you can feel confident that it will meet your needs. Assuming your needs are in line with the aforementioned conditions, ex. yes, a "military grade" laptop will be bulky, and grandma will not care about that feature, but someone in an auto-shop who needs a laptop to withstand all sorts of punishment might feel the extra bucks are worth the confidence.
My assumption here is you and those with similar views do not view privacy as a requirement for grandma, and I think that is the crux of the argument. Privacy can be its own reward and everyone will determine their own value for it. If grandma's circumstances are that she needs/wants that privacy, then having a battle tested solution that can be counted on is an easy decision to make.
That's not really what I was saying either. The technology behind it costs nothing to reproduce. Sure there are costs, ex. there were costs to develop the technology, there are costs to maintain infrastructure and costs for continuing development. However those costs also exist in our current system and they could easily be seen as lower with cryptos.
It is nothing, since nobody is going to be shooting at your car unless you live in a warzone. It gives you protection against a non-existent threat, while costing you money and convenience.
you are trying to straddle a line and it won't go anywhere.
so let me help you: crypto is a better solution for e-commerce and people won't be able to get doxxed when employing the best practices. the best practices will become more convenient.
from my perspective, you are advocating for the worst opsec possible: "hey everyone add your name, address, and the private key to all your funds for the credit/debit network to every site, just because using crypto is inconvenient for grandma for now and therefore only for the 'worst of society'"
its funny to me because you don't even realize thats your argument, since you are focused on the specific use case of far-right subscribers not being able to get doxxed when actual criminals actually hack a website
