Some legal trouble with TOR in France
or at inbox.org
Tue May 16 23:59:47 UTC 2006
On 5/16/06, Michael Holstein <michael.holstein at csuohio.edu> wrote:
> I disagree though that allowing police worldwide to come up with a
> "blacklist" .. first it's under the guise of "protecting children" .. so
> first the porn goes there. What next? talk about drugs, sex, ?
> We're supposed to be making it harder to censor, not easier.
And we do this by censoring a blacklist?
I don't have a problem with the police coming up with a "blacklist".
I don't even have a problem with people following it. But the way I
see it Tor is about privacy, not censorship.
> PS: for those that notice the dichotomy between this and my previous
> email about blocking academic journal access, this has to do not with
> ideals, but practicality in getting institutional ssupport. I can handle
> the police just fine, internal muckety-mucks are harder.
Personally I have more of a problem with going to jail than not being
able to convince institutions to sponsor my computing/bandwidth
expenses. I don't think I'm alone, either. If people could run an
exit node and still avoid getting mixed up with the law by
implementing a particular blacklist, I think the number of exit nodes
would go up dramatically.
But, as I've said in most of my replies to these threads, I don't
think such a solution is currently feasible. Actually what would be
more feasible is a whitelist. Maybe some exit nodes could provide a
list of the most popular exit IP addresses.
More information about the tor-talk