RE: Tor limitation

["Bob" <monfster@xxxxxxxxx>]

I don't think refusing to do business with them would be a better thing than
to "comply with local government laws".  It certainly wouldn't put the
people of China in a better position than they are now, even with the
compromises, I think it would put them in a position similar to Cuban
citizens - stuck with nothing but old technology, with even less access to
any part of the internet (the Cuban anology is very loose, I was thinking of
all the old 1950-something Chevys that they drive), because, as you say, any
access is better than none, and the change has to come from within.  But I
think the help that these companies offer is primarily (maybe even solely)
for the purpose of making a profit.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of nile
> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 9:50 PM
> To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Tor limitation
>
> Definitely. I've felt much the same way myself, along with
> all the anger
> and rage at hearing of huge companies like Yahoo, Google, Microsoft,
> Cisco, all helping the Chinese government in varying degrees to limit
> the internet.
>
> Their excuse is that they must comply with local government laws. I
> don't really believe the people that make those decisions at those
> companies are all greedy, evil, or morally bankrupt, though.
> I think they
> really believe China /will/ eventually become more open and
> democratic.
> Indeed, access to the internet, even if it is limited, may very well
> allow change to happen faster than it would otherwise. Maybe I'm being
> way too optimistic.
>
> But, I guess we've kind of strayed off the topic of Tor now. So, how
> about that exit node problem?