Hacker News Reader

Comment by trendia | Hacker News Reader

Previously [0], HN and experts criticized SpiderOak for using the term improperly in their marketing. (E2E is not the same as zero-knowledge storage). And now they admit that they knew at the time that it was used improperly.

So, why did they use it?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13301936

View on HN

This is misleading.

They admitted at the time they knew it was being used improperly, they were just attached to the usage.

They are now following up to say they have detached themselves from this usage. This seems like very responsible behaviour that should be applauded.

I'm pointing out that they knowlingly used a word improperly... and for that I am called misleading.

You suggested that they were only coping to the improper use now, rather than being upfront about it at the time. That's misleading.

Probably because it's difficult to explain E2E to users in an easily-digestible way, and most users don't know the cryptographic definition of zero knowledge. I'm not excusing their use of the term, but I can see why they think new terminology is needed.

So, why did they use it?

I do not know why, but good marketing and technical accuracy can easily clash. Even just trying to communicate generally can be tripped up by different uses of the same term. You tend to find that out by stepping in it, not by somehow knowing ahead of time that X term will be drama for some reason.

"zero" is one of those cool words. You'd have to beat the promotional types off with a stick.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com