[yes, I know I'm preaching to the choir]

> ----- Forwarded message from Roger Dingledine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----

> > A potential for cooperation is the proposal below for authenticated
> > access to Wikipedia through Tor. I will not speak to any particular
> > design here, but if Wikipedia has a notion of clients trusted to post
> > to Wikipedia, it should be possible to work with them to have an
> > authentication server that controls access to Wikipedia through Tor.
> As I understand it, Jimmy is hoping that we will develop and maintain
> this notion. We would run both "halves" of the Tor network, and when they
> complain about a user, we would cut that user out of the authenticated
> side.

A non-good idea, as it goes against what Tor is all about.

The problem to be overcome here really has nothing to do with Tor, as such.

> Wikipedia already needs this sort of thing because of AOL IPs -- they
> have similar characteristics to Tor, in that a single IP produces lots
> of behavior, some good some bad.

So Wikipedia understands that the transport layer isn't to blame, yet they
persist in asking for changes in the Tor transport to address the problem of
malicious users?  *groan*

> (One might argue that it's hard for Wikipedia to change their perception
> and learn about any good Tor uses, firstly because good users will
> blend in and nobody will notice, and secondly because they've prevented
> them all from editing so there are no data points either way.)

That's not the perception they need to change.  They need to realize that if an
avenue for action without responsibility exists, someone will use it.  Wikis
get defaced all the time *without* AOL or Tor, because the philosophy allows
anyone to edit.  It is that philosophy that is in error, not the transport
layers used by the vandals.  Wiki, as someone mentioned to me in a private
mail, is the SMTP of web publishing; it doesn't scale well in the presence of
large concentrations of assholes.

> In summary, I'm not too unhappy with the status quo for now. Tor needs
> way more basic development / usability work still. In the absence of
> actual volunteers-who-code on the side of Tor _or_ Wikipedia to resolve
> the problem, I'm going to focus on continuing to make Tor better, so
> down the road maybe we'll be able to see better answers.

Roger gets it.  The Wikipedians don't.
Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not
"It's just this little chromium switch, here." - TFT

Reply via email to