i wish i could recall which talk it was. i've watched so many without taking notes recently as a quick study aid.
sorry about that. On Oct 3, 2014, at 8:48 AM, z9wahqvh wrote: > thank you, this is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for. I'll see if > I can find it in one of Roger's videos, though if anyone has a specific > pointer that would be very much appreciated. > > On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:57 PM, stn <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> i think roger dingledine presented some short timeline evidence awhile >> back in a video i saw but this is from memory. >> >> a US university and the DoJ usa tallied tor traffic on their relay and >> only found something like 3% "unwanted" traffic. >> >> that could have included things like copyrighted music sharing. >> the study wasn't continued for some reason. >> >> maybe someone who can correctly recall the event or study can fill in some >> blanks and verify but ... >> >> only 3% "unwanted" traffic. that's easy to take IMO. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:43 PM, Mirimir wrote: >> >>> On 10/02/2014 04:35 PM, z9wahqvh wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 10/02/2014 01:24 PM, z9wahqvh wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Even if (for argument's sake) 99% of Tor users/uses were unqualifiedly >>>>> evil, that would say nothing about Tor. At most, it would speak to its >>>>> relatively slow uptake overall, and perhaps to the prevalence of evil >> in >>>>> the world. An anonymity system with a backdoor for outing evil (however >>>>> defined) would be unworkable, and would soon die. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I don't know how to parse "say" in this paragraph. It certainly seems to >>>> "say" something about the role of unsurveillable absolute anonymous >>>> communications systems and who is going to be attracted to them and why. >>> >>> If everyone used "unsurveillable absolute anonymous communications >>> systems", the prevalence of evil on them would be the same as the >>> overall prevalence of evil. Right? Those who play on the supposed >>> association of Tor with evil are not friends of freedom. >>> >>>> It also would seem to raise serious questions about whether such efforts >>>> should be supported >>> >>> If you choose to support Tor, then do. If you don't, then don't. Others >>> can make their own choices, based on their principles and values. >>> >>>> --and, to raise questions raised in other threads here, whether ISPs and >>>> other service providers and websites should let Tor relays through. >>> >>> There are more-effective solutions that don't hurt the innocent. >>> >>>> Note that if you are correct, you are painting an extremely dark picture >>>> of our political future, in which constitutional governance and rule of >>>> law become, strictly speaking, impossible. You may think that this will >>>> decrease the amount of evil in the world. My reading of world history >>>> suggests otherwise. >>> >>> It should be obvious that I'm no statist. But discussions of politics >>> are off-topic on this list. So I'll not address the rest of your post. >>> >>> <SNIP> >>> -- >>> tor-talk mailing list - [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to >>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk >> >> -- >> tor-talk mailing list - [email protected] >> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk >> > -- > tor-talk mailing list - [email protected] > To unsubscribe or change other settings go to > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk -- tor-talk mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
