-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > If the trail leads through a foreign node then they can't follow it, > which isn't the case with harvesting.
[...] > >again, how many dead users is OK with you? > > That's the third time you've asked and still no bites. I'm not /just/ emotionally baiting - these two are actually intimately related. One's answer determines what solution makes sense. If you're fine with some people getting busted, automated harvesting matters, as it reduces the rate at which people are busted and gives those who weren't time to cover their tracks. On the other hand, if you're not fine with people getting busted, automated harvesting is irrelevent, as some people will get busted for reasons discussed previously. Advertizing something as being secure when it just means "ok, some people will get busted, but hopefully not you" doesn't sound that great. Crossing control boundaries (separate from jurisdictional boundaries these days) does certainly slow down harvesting, but that doesn't matter to the people in the hostile regimes, as they're the ones with their freedom on the line. =jr -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDRB2MWYfZ3rPnHH0RAoVCAJ97jss7CoKUWw6WQbWgt6tW6rVSKQCff8IY Ai0mhppuKk6lG3eg5Nl3WpU= =W5rF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
