[tor-talk] "Hidden Services" vs "Onion services"

Virgil Griffith i at virgil.gr
Sat Nov 15 10:25:41 UTC 2014

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".


On Saturday, November 15, 2014, Katya Titov <kattitov at yandex.com> 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 - tor-talk at lists.torproject.org <javascript:;>
> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

More information about the tor-talk mailing list