[tor-talk] New Tool Keeps Censors in the Dark - mentions Tor.

[Joe Btfsplk]

On 8/6/2011 10:56 AM, Jimmy Richardson wrote:
> This won't work well seeing Google is already kicked out of China.
Exactly.
> You lost me at "If google were to..."  Google & privacy is the 
> definition of an oxymoron.  They're way down the list of organizations 
> many users would want having any role in some anonymity endeavor.
>

> This is not about privacy, it's about anti-censorship, and Google is a 
> good resource in terms of anti-censorship.
How so - other than not wanting their corporation to be censored?  Do 
they have a record of refusing to give data to gov'ts?

Privacy, anonymity & anti-censorship seem interrelated.  Anonymity 
implies privacy.  Google is in business to make money, not promote 
anti-censorship or free speech.  Censoring them cuts into their 
earnings, so yes, they are against censorship - * involving their 
corporation. *  IMO, if I lived in a country where my life or possible 
imprisonment depended on internet anonymity / security, I wouldn't trust 
Google to keep me safe.  I'm quite sure other entities eventually could 
provide some service / method to access banned sites, w/o $ being the 
main objective.

Forget Telex or Tor for the moment.  Eventually, individuals or groups 
have always found an "underground" way around censorship (if they wanted 
to) during wars, etc., sans the internet.  The answer to avoid 
censorship may not involve the internet at all.  Ultimately, passing or 
accessing censored or what gov'ts consider subversive info * through any 
ISP,* that keeps records & is legally bound to cooperate w/ govt's 
doesn't seem like the best idea.  I wouldn't go to the NSA's office to 
have a secret phone conversation.  Just my opinion.