I pretty openly admit that I am mildly autistic, with traits of savantism, in addition to being non-exclusively ephebephilic, which is colloquially considered to be pedophilia in a minority of the world. If you meant that as an insult to me it didn't really come across as such. I am not trying to compete with you. Mostly I am trying to get you to start reading things through before you comment on them. This was the straw that broke the camels back for me. It was also the most insidious of your misconceptions, if you think Zerocoin is impossible it doesn't really matter, but when people hear a respected member of the community say that Privnote is just as safe as GPG it leads to very real insecure practices. You are not comprehending the problems with javascript. Javascript being slow doesn't matter, javascript not being able to carry out operations in fixed units of time makes it unsuitable for cryptography. Javascript can not accomplish a secure implementation of a cryptographic algorithm. You can implement AES to specification in javascript, but the fact that it is implemented in javascript will make it an insecure implementation even if it perfectly follows the specification. The articles I linked to also point out a variety of other issues, ranging from lack of secure CSPRNG, lack of ability to protect from MITM attacks, etc. Javascript crypto is death by a million side channel attacks. I don't even claim to be a professional cryptographer, because I am not one. I know enough to implement some basic block ciphers, pseudorandom number generators, etc, but I sure as hell cannot design something like AES or even implement something like AES. But I listen to professional cryptographers, and the thing I always hear from them is that javascript and cryptography do not mix. Interpreted languages and cryptography do not mix. You can end up with something that looks like it works, and something that follows the specification, but the inherent weaknesses of the languages run time environment will side channel the shit out of the cryptosystem. Browser based javascript is even worse, in addition to having all of the problems of javascript it also has the weaknesses to MITM etc that come from it being browser based. So to answer your question: professional cryptographers give a fuck. The people who don't seem to give a fuck are people who know how to program in javascript and write web applications, but who have absolutely zero education in programming cryptographically secure applications. It seems everybody who knows how to program thinks that they are inherently a cryptographer because of it. You are the one who clearly doesn't understand how interpreters work, and how that is contradictory to the goals of cryptographically secure programming. Privnote is an extremely poorly designed cryptosystem that was written in a language that shouldn't be used for implementing cryptographic algorithms in, in the worst way they could have used the language to implement their broken system. I do understand that javascript was the 'right tool' for the job of Privnote, but what you don't seem to understand is that the right tool can sometimes make the wrong product. A hammer is the right tool to make a wooden box with, it doesn't mean you should build a wooden box with a hammer and then try to use it as a submarine. It also doesn't mean that you can build a submarine with a hammer. k thanks