IDS bells ringing

[Chris Palmer]

patgus wrote:

> You are missing my point. Please reread the second paragraph.

Which, for reference, is:

> You all have got to do something about this, as this would be a prime
> argument AGAINST this kind of software. If our isps are shutting us 
> all down there will not be too many servers online.

I think everyone understands your (not invalid) point. It's just that we 
accept all kinds of risks every day, and we deal with them. By using 
computers (and cars, and buildings, and ...) we open ourselves up to 
risks, but we continue to use them because the benefit they provide is 
greater than the risks. And the risks can be mitigated.

It's the same for Tor. Tor is more beneficial than it is risky, plain 
and simple.

To demonstrate the point, consider that the framers of the US 
Constitution provided for (and themselves made heavy use of) anonymous 
speech, even as they explicitly acknowledged the inherent risks. The US 
Supreme Court (and lower courts) continually reaffirm the right to free 
speech, even in the face of risks.