91–100 of 128 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wrong. If the majority of potential supporters are on Facebook, an activist needs to be on Facebook.
Then VPN access paid for by bitcoins will do. Tor is not the only game in town.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Millions" of people use Tor? You can make an argument for anonymity without resorting to hyperbole.
"Using free software, Tor has enabled roughly 36 million people around the world to experience freedom of access and expression on the Internet while keeping them in control of their privacy and anonymity." http://www.fsf.org/news/2010-free-software-awards-announced
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a lot more than just a business entity, unfortunately. The government tends to look out for and protect its biggest corporate partners, particularly those that play a strategic role (think: Boeing). The major Internet services companies are now protected government sponsored entities, just like Verizon and AT&T. The Feds can never risk the potential that the massive orgy of data that Facebook makes possible - bo…
> just like Verizon and AT&T. As an European I never understood what is the "strategic" interest of Washington to protect the telecom companies. This might have made sense 20 years ago, but now that these companies tend to become like any other utility companies I don't see why the Government would care if they break up or if new (possibly foreign) competitors appear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On what do you base this speculation? To me, the trend seems to be just the opposite. Internet use for the average person is increasingly non-anonymous. Only techies use Tor, PGP, etc.
Yep, your parent presupposes people get better at computers. Moore's law does not apply to people.
People get better at this stuff, but slowly. The current privacy issue is growing in the public consciousness, spurring action from "techies". Maybe 20 years from now easy to use encryption will be the norm, even among regular people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Writing on FB using Tor kind of defeats the purpose, no?
Maybe you are trying to hide your physical location.
The world is so different place in unsafe countries, people might be playing with their lives(and lives of their close ones) for doing this stuff. It's not unlikely for a totalitarian government to assassinate opposition, to physically kill activists. You say that's wrong, but I ask whatcha gonna do about it?
Lets let them use TOR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Facebook can no longer stake any preposterous claim to "help people connect better". Why not? Facebook does help billions of people connect better. Yes, it is a business entity and what's wrong with that? Does this make it inherently evil? Do non business entity do a better job at "making the world a better place"? Look at the latest NSA scandal to get an idea. At least we're not forced to pay Facebook with our tax…
Yes, however will Facebook fight spam without blocking Tor... http://www.paulgraham.com/spam.html
The privatized 'public' space makes an inevitable move. Facebook can no longer stake any preposterous claim to "help people connect better". It is a business entity - always has been - and does not give half a damn about "making the world a better place", or whatever corporate marketing catchphrase they use right now. Related to recent events or not, the privatized internet is continuing to backlash with severe conse…
Can you elaborate on a few of your claims here? First, you seem to imply that a privately-owned public space is a bad thing. What alternatives do you envision? Wouldn't a space regulated and controlled by governmental entities or NGOs be just as liable to abuse? Second, when you speak about "Facebook," what do you mean? Do you mean that the people who work there don't care about helping people connecting there? That…
I didn't RTFA but use of Tor can impair Facebook's tracking of people, thus making the data about people less valuable commodities to sell to their advertisers. Using Tor may also increase Facebook's network usage a bit by making less use of cached data, locally and remotely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, your parent presupposes people get better at computers. Moore's law does not apply to people.
I disagree. Only 20 years ago the GP would be saying "Only techies use email, web, etc." People get better at this stuff, but slowly. The current privacy issue is growing in the public consciousness, spurring action from "techies". Maybe 20 years from now easy to use encryption will be the norm, even among regular people.