Re: [tor-talk] Terminology: Deep v Dark Web

[Rick <rerushg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 01/26/2014 06:23 AM, Katya Titov wrote:
> I generally agree, however the term is in common usage and we're 
> probably stuck with it, just as we're stuck with the common definition 
> of the word 'hacker'. I guess we could define a synonymous word and 
> use that in lieu of "dark" ... 'private' isn't quite correct, and 
> 'hidden' probably isn't either. I like 'overlay' but I'm not sure how 
> it would go with the media and users. I've placed some definitions in 
> the article and made some rearrangements and minor additions. Please 
> feel free to update and/or discuss. 
Why should you be stuck with anything? You're writing an important piece 
for an important project: You know... the onion with the crown? What 
you're writing may well become a source, a reference. You drive the 
conversation. All the words are belong to you. :)

In a very broad sense I'd suggest:

'Commercial' that is open to all (sort of) and is after whatever can be 
monetized.

'Private' that is behind all those heavy-metal firewalls and exists 
primarily in support of 'commercial'.

'Neutral' for those referred to as 'deep' or 'dark' and, like Tor, seek 
to be common carriers:Identity is by choice, not by mandate. The 
connotations of the word 'neutral' are benign. It also suggests 'net 
neutrality' (original recipe... not KFCC's extra-crispy). Further, 
'Neutral Net' has a nice ring to it. Shorten that to 'NeuNet' and the 
media might run with the concept. They love that stuff; it makes the 
Pulitzer fairies run around in their heads.


Happy trails,
Rick
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk