If an expensive marketing company were trying to come up with a term to describe more anonymous networks such as .onion, even though "dark net" certainly fits, they would probably discourage it because of the reasons previously mentioned.
I don't like "deep web", and I think we can do better than "dark net". I'll accept whatever the TOR leadership tells me to use. Perhaps something with more neutral connotations, something less "veiled net", "incog net" / " icognet", or "shielded net". -V On Saturday, November 15, 2014, Katya Titov <[email protected]> wrote: > Paolo Cardullo: > > This was an interesting discussion. > > > > I was just thinking of starting a thread on why people use the > > appellative 'dark' as for 'dark net'. I found it quite disturbing and > > offensive, also in a racialised way. > > > > [...] > > > > I strongly disagree and I suggest to drop 'dark' from TOR services. > > Funny enough, only the day after the chief of London MET declared: > > 'internet has become a “dark and ungoverned” space populated by > > paedophiles, murderers and terrorists'. This also can be seen with a > > shade of racism. > > I opened a lengthy discussion about this in January: > > > https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-January/thread.html#31863 > > No real outcome. > > The name is what it is, and I think it's stuck. > > -- > kat > -- > tor-talk mailing list - [email protected] <javascript:;> > 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
