begin quoting Andrew Lentvorski as of Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 12:44:09AM -0700: > kelsey hudson wrote: [snip] > >And herein lies the reason why services like this are useless. If you > >want privacy, get off the internet, plain and simple. > > Flamebait, but I'll bite. > > By your argument, there's no point in passwords. After all, if you want > privacy, you can't get on the internet, plain and simple.
Can't get on the Internet, don't hold a job, own a house, use a credit card, bank card, or checkbook, . . . > We trade the usefulness of the internet off against the privacy loss. > The government is interested in making the privacy loss greater than it > currently is. We're interested in making the privacy loss less than it > currently is. Heh. This reminds me of the Great Caller ID debate. Some people do not like Caller ID because it "violates the privacy of the caller" and "doesn't work anyway". They spin elaborate scenarios about witness protection programs and stranded children. I figure if you don't tell me who you are, then I have no obligation to pick up the phone -- the same goes for the 'Net. If you won't tell me who you are, that's your choice, and I don't want to take away your anonymity; but if you're connecting to *my* machine, I have no obligation to respect your desire for anonymity. > >Any time you > >connect yourself (your computer?) to a public network, you open up > >yourself to scrutiny. If you can't deal with that, then don't > >participate. If the risks outweigh the benefits, then stop being > >paranoid and do the same thing the rest of us do: deal with it and move on. > > No. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get > you. ;) > > Systems like TOR exist in order to move the benefits/risks ratio closer > to 1. > > I never claimed that ever moves to 1. If the government really wants to > monitor me, they will use wiretaps, keyloggers, remote laser > eavesdropping, etc. > > However, I don't have to make it painless and risk-free for them, either. The goal of defense is to make the other guy think twice about spending resources. Maybe they'll go somewhere else, or maybe they'll spend those resources on you and not have them available for someone else. Either way, it's a win. -- Why should I make it easy on the bad guys? Stewart Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
