Tor Project is looking for a Communications Director!

I suspect the OP might not be entirely serious, but I'll take a stab at trying to make some very basic points:

> WHY DON"T YOU SIMPLIFY TOR CODING?

Complexity is the enemy of security, so it is certainly desirable to keep the code (especially for core functions) as simple as possible. However, Tor software must attempt to address many problems which are unfortunately far from simple, which leads to some hard to reduce complexities.

> I MEAN IF YOU HAVE THE BASIC CODING YOU DO NOT REALLY NEED TO KEEP UPDATING IT

In an ideal world, coders would have reliable proofs that their software is free of security flaws. Indeed, for decades leading researchers have struggled to provide just such a framework. Pretty much everyone agrees (sadly) that they have failed, completely and utterly.

In the real world, coders are in an endless arms race against state-sponsored bad actors (and other kinds of bad actors) who continually uncover and exploit flaws which the good guys have overlooked. For this reason, every cybersecurity expert (as far as I can see) says that the single most important thing anyone can do to improve their security is to promptly update their software as soon as security patches are released. In the case of Tor Browser, Tails, etc., this means promptly updating as soon as the latest stable version is released.

> BECAUSE THE CORE CODE IS THERE AND THAT IS IT TO PROTECT SECURITY AND PRIVACY AND YOUR ID. CODE IS STILL CODE.

??

> JUST MAKE A QUANTUM TOR SYSTEM THAT IS IMPENETRABLE FOREVER. THAT IS IT!

Oh my, if only one could wave a magic wand and make everything secure against quantum computer attacks. And if you were talking about quantum encryption, as far as I know this is best described as a research topic on which many smart people have been working for years, but which is so far not practical for everyday use on the Internet as it now exists.

Unfortunately, in keeping with the incredible disparity between (current) offensive techniques and (currently available) defenses, my understanding is that hybrid quantum-conventional computers designed to *break* existing encryption is coming on line far faster than well tested quantum encryption which could potentially defeat quantum cryptanalysis of conventional cryptography.

NIST (a small US federal agency which has had a USG mandate to produce industy standards for strong cryptography for use by US businesses and private citizens, and which has suffered in the recent past from being gulled by NSA and is determined to resist future NSA efforts to mess with NIST) has devoted a considerable part of its limited budget to fostering research into resisting quantum computing attacks on cryptography in conventional computers. Long known alternative public key methods may turn out to be more resistant than RSA, for example. And the greatest risk appears to threaten public key encryption, not the kind of encryption used by LUKS to encrypt hard drives or USBs. This may help to calm some (but not all) fears about quantum cryptanalysis.

Not that I am applying for the position myself :)

will he/she plan to be in contact with dev team who are not working for Torproject like dev mac or dev grc or dns operators ?