slowpoke

Again, Flash Proxy is not an exit node, it's a bridge. It merely helps people to access the Tor network, and does not relay traffic back out (which, as far as I know, is not even technically possible). There's zero risks involved. Also, why are you not running at least a relay, anyways?

>2. People concerned about limiting criminal behavior

Limiting criminal behavior is fine, but never at the cost of essential liberties and rights. This is inarguable. People rallying against Tor for "criminal behavior" are the very same people we need Tor to protect ourselves against.

>3. People who want to stop free speech

I you[1] are such a person, I hate you and you more than deserve to have your browser turned into a powerful weapon of the very thing you want to stop.

[1] This is the general you, I'm not talking to the parent poster specifically.

Comment · 14 years ago

It's equally debatable whether it's okay to put stupid advertisements or tracking technology on your website - which have infinitely less positive benefits for humanity than Tor.

Anyways, my answer wasn't about Flash-Proxy at all (which is, polemics aside, indeed debatable). I was pissed about the attitude that Tor == CP, which is a dishonest fallacy thrown around by supporters of surveillance and spying.

Comment · 14 years ago

It makes me extremely sad - and somewhat angry - that a lot of people just associate Tor with CP and criminals. Tor enabled and helped carry out fucking revolutions. Hundreds, if not thousands of (not only) chinese dissidents use it to communicate safely. It protects lives. Tor is a blessing upon humanity, and a big, fat, thorn in the side of every oppressive government on this planet.

The fact that some individuals use Tor for accessing child pornography is sad, but that constitutes a miniscule amount of its entire traffic. Stop looking at the few bad apples and look at the big picture.

Oh, and if you're at it, watch Jacob and Roger's talk at the 29c3 as soon as it is available. They explained this awesome piece of software a bit more in detail there, amongst all the other amazing projects related to the Tor Project.

Comment · 14 years ago

>a serious crime

You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means.

Piracy is not a crime, much less a serious one. Murder, for example, is a serious crime. Please don't spout nonsense. Copyright infringement is a civil offense, not even a felony.

That is not to say that what Canonical did - if the accusations are justified - is ethically sound. But please don't spread the bullshit propaganda of certain industry representatives.

Comment · 14 years ago

The bad thing about the "nothing to hide" camp usually isn't their opinion that they themselves have nothing to hide, but the fact that the majority of these people seem to want to force this opinion on the rest of society. Fine, live your rose-colored post-privacy life. But leave me the fuck out of it. I have things to hide. Everyone has. You included.

Comment · 14 years ago

"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."

- Cardinal Richelieu

Comment · 14 years ago

>For some people, jobs are hard to come by, I would wager the majority of TSA screeners do not have any better paying options, so to criticize them for being a part of a faulty system, or to paint them as being "from a sixth grade mentality", or "trying to get employed with border patrol asap" when they are just trying to provide for themselves and their families, who may not have better options, is pretty unfair.

I don't think so. It's very valid to criticize someone who works for a morally corrupt, unneeded and socially harmful agency, no matter the reason. Your argument is basically a sophisticated "but think of the children!!11oneone" appeal to emotion, ie not a valid argument.

If there aren't any better job options (which I highly doubt), then it's another gigantic fucking failure of the government that needs to be fixed ASAP.

Comment · 14 years ago

Your examples only make a legal name important if you consider these things important. I don't, and they aren't. Part of why we need to get rid of the concept of a legal name is exactly for this reason. A government has no business and no authority to decide who I am.

Comment · 14 years ago

I always wonder during those discussions - what exactly is a "real" name supposed to be? I don't have "real" name. Rather, I have many chosen names, and a name my parents gave me. I consider all of these names real, as they refer to a facet of my personality, a part of me.

I do have a legal name - my birth name. It's but one of many. Why is my legal name important? It isn't. I don't even consider it my primary name. The concept of one single "real" name is severely retarded and flies in the face of reality. We need to get rid of this concept, along with the illusion of a single identity. I simply am not the same person when I am with my parents, when I'm with my meatspace friends, or if I'm hanging out on IRC with people I know pretty well, but have never seen or met. I'm someone different here on HN than I am on 4chan, or any other message board. That's perfectly human, and no company or law will ever change that.