[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-talk] Neal Krawetz's abcission proposal, and Tor's reputation

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 5:51 AM, Jon Tullett <jon.tullett@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/773-Tor-and-the-Perfect-Storm.html

Oh ye with fervent glee does their hand yet raise to censor others,
woes their hand be lopped for stew when censor come back round to them.

They appear to have little clue on some of the philosopical origins
and need for tools like Tor / I2P / etc.

If you want to be censored nannied persecuted prosecuted taxed
regulated permissioned ruled by majority mobs spied collected
databased datamined sold chilled oppressed moderated silenced
enslaved etc, and perform the same upon others, continue living
life on clearnet as usual.

Nor they understand fork... Say tor never been influenced by twisted
schemes as some say BTC has been... any implementation of this
proposal would be instantly met and mooted by a preservation and
development fork... just like BCC.  Furthermore, first generation
tools are often found weak / feature lacking, leading to a market
in improved generations...
ie: Zcash and Zensystem for better privacy / security / anonymity
/ untraceability, and many others for many other features, models
and approaches.

The anonymity, anti censorship, anti analysis, etc capabilities of
todays overlay networks actually needs to be improved, not removed.
It's about time we see a next generation.

Yet their own censorious implementation is welcome though, along
with all other nextgens that want to enter the market. We'll see
which tools win.

(technote: Longterm online static onions are more easily findable,
see the whitepapers, such that some onion services are now actually
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to