Mark J. Roberts ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The goal of Freenet is anonymous publishing and reading. What use do
> law-abiding people have for anonymity? Not much. Not much compared to
> the many uses thought-criminals have for anonymity.
This answer is not sufficient. Consider:
* Employees who endure inhumane or even illegal practices in their
workplace might be afraid to speak out because they cannot face
the economic consequences of termination.
* Victims of incest, sexual assault or physical abuse may be afraid
to speak out because they are embarrassed or ashamed.
* Citizens who suffer human rights violations at the hands of their
government may be unable to speak out without facing torture or
death.
Anonymity can enable these people to be heard.
> There is absolutely no need to be "careful" because the code speaks for
> itself. Freenet is a network designed to help criminals evade the
> police.
Of the three examples I gave above, only the last one casts the user of
Freenet in the role of the "criminal". But I doubt anyone reading this
would say that the Freenet user should be forced to divulge her identity
in that case.
--
Greg Wooledge | "Truth belongs to everybody."
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | - The Red Hot Chili Peppers
http://wooledge.org/~greg/ |
PGP signature
