Post #1314141
2026-04-04 08:26 UTC
@jadehopepunk what are the odds, I went down the same chain of thoughts yesterday as well while trying to read through the reticulum materials. The original author has made it clear that he wanted the license to protect the actual implementation not to be used for these purposes, but wanted the general idea and specs for reticulum to be free for any purpose which made no sense for me given how strong his statements felt on the matter.
Anyway beechat feels extremely sketchy as they tried to create a first look of a privacy-first group working to empower the similar-minded people, while they have only 3 products on their page (with a soldier in uniform as the background image) and all of the products are for tactical use, priced in the thousands of euros, clearly targeting to scalp military procurements (coming from our taxes btw).
Replies (1)
-
@jadehopepunk@hachyderm.io 2026-04-04 08:35
@temporary I think that the reticulum author (Mark Qvist) had no capacity or interest in holding the community strongly enough to ensure a certain direction of use. I may not even be politically aligned with him on everything, there's an occasionally libertarian edge to his writings. It'd be kind of nice if we could all agree as a baseline that harming humans is bad though. I'm not a complete pacifist, but in most cases the buyers of expensive military toys are the aggressors and imperialists.