Without answering Jillian’s question directly, I have to say: “the more, the merrier.”
Right now, in cybercensored countries, it’s true many folks (though far from all) have heard about one or more cybercircumvention tools. But most folks’ attempts to use them are not entirely successful, either because * their proxies are blocked too, or * the proxy to which they can get access is overloaded. At this point, the need for more proxies to solve these two problems is far from exhausted. I still haven’t heard of any cases where someone’s been persecuted because they used a proxy. I’m certainly not saying folks shouldn’t care about anonymity, just remembering that for the vast majority of cybercensored netizens, anonymity isn’t what they perceive to be the issue they face when they browse; censorship is. Best, Eric <http://keyserver.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0xE0F58E0F1AF7E6F2> OpenPGP: 0x1AF7E6F2 ● Skype: oneota ● XMPP/OTR: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] ● Silent Circle: +1 312 614-0159 From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jillian C. York Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 08.01 To: liberationtech Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Google Unveils Tools to Access Web From Repressive Countries | TIME.com Since I already have more skepticism of Google Ideas and Jared Cohen than I need, let me pose this question: With the understanding that uProxy provides no anonymity protections, is it providing anything that other circumvention tools do not already? What's unique about it?
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected].
