Delivery-Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:49:28 -0400
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A92DB1E0A06;
	Fri,  3 Oct 2014 08:49:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4DBE30EED;
	Fri,  3 Oct 2014 12:49:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89FE7269B9
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri,  3 Oct 2014 12:49:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eugeni.torproject.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id frZJrzwAnxq7 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Fri,  3 Oct 2014 12:49:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qc0-x235.google.com (mail-qc0-x235.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::235])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B4EE2442D
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri,  3 Oct 2014 12:49:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qc0-f181.google.com with SMTP id r5so863322qcx.26
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 05:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
 :subject:to:content-type;
 bh=1fM+BXxK56jCMrMf3Ds6YXQQSSIt8zE9NBfkM+nNwTE=;
 b=opv0oTdsBZtoej+N7CrMrMhj/UbNut8h4JI6WUZUvt5ObRA+GinoxnpeIfYgNA1Y2D
 m1l0wwu60xLwe8lN3qs2cx2MRfG/QZJ98rJI4M1G4UdK+t0DGB+XKU8xOQZTF4HTvhj3
 O8yxJ6AAASntzMWr54gh58IWZnoZRFU1FPVnY97JrcwA37lp99hOdyj5FULmg1edTAYk
 HJBl0QlaH3RKYK7qjHsw5D33t0HVw991ZDNnIM4ktINti7vZh+nRg1w+HUkG6hrQem2K
 dGd516dK1gA4AxihvAR+l5Wzh2B0w+3Dwhvw0ukxdictQ2uxYD3QJjQslZm/JKJzbr1k
 7nVA==
X-Received: by 10.224.120.138 with SMTP id d10mr7300054qar.8.1412340556810;
 Fri, 03 Oct 2014 05:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.92.161 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 05:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BBF13601-6B2B-4AA6-82BC-57AB9A4AD28E@ncf.ca>
References: <CAOHwwFKOx9zkb0qF0mvUoiRqb-=7swd22qadA-AVz+mWvQQb-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <7c154825-d74c-456e-91ff-89865e728da6@email.android.com>
 <CAJoS0DXCqTQ82ytKdJXztUdHhUf8v_iA12r83fkG2ETMBxdVRg@mail.gmail.com>
 <542D9828.6010008@torproject.is>
 <CAJoS0DV_tJvNeajbAeMmCYPaivmHgAkLBQ8NQO0jWijXGL+rxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <542DB469.6050801@riseup.net>
 <CAJoS0DXmKD6Av9nbJdUBUvbTo7wa3xrQuyN4TnKHbg7SDTZXig@mail.gmail.com>
 <542DE328.6020006@riseup.net> <BBF13601-6B2B-4AA6-82BC-57AB9A4AD28E@ncf.ca>
From: z9wahqvh <z9wahqvh@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 08:48:45 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: Z0HdBLKblpup609B7G-93XJa-kE
Message-ID: <CAJoS0DVk48OC-qZ1=e2iv1kBoyqgONEw=Nic8mUCz2+6X+W_Ow@mail.gmail.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Tor in the media
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

thank you, this is exactly the sort of thing I was looking for. I'll see if
I can find it in one of Roger's videos, though if anyone has a specific
pointer that would be very much appreciated.

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:57 PM, stn <stn@ncf.ca> wrote:

>
> i think roger dingledine presented some short timeline evidence awhile
> back in a video i saw but this is from memory.
>
> a US university and the DoJ usa tallied tor traffic on their relay and
> only found something like 3% "unwanted" traffic.
>
> that could have included things like copyrighted music sharing.
> the study wasn't continued for some reason.
>
> maybe someone who can correctly recall the event or study can fill in some
> blanks and verify but ...
>
> only 3% "unwanted" traffic. that's easy to take IMO.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:43 PM, Mirimir wrote:
>
> > On 10/02/2014 04:35 PM, z9wahqvh wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 10/02/2014 01:24 PM, z9wahqvh wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Even if (for argument's sake) 99% of Tor users/uses were unqualifiedly
> >>> evil, that would say nothing about Tor. At most, it would speak to its
> >>> relatively slow uptake overall, and perhaps to the prevalence of evil
> in
> >>> the world. An anonymity system with a backdoor for outing evil (however
> >>> defined) would be unworkable, and would soon die.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I don't know how to parse "say" in this paragraph. It certainly seems to
> >> "say" something about the role of unsurveillable absolute anonymous
> >> communications systems and who is going to be attracted to them and why.
> >
> > If everyone used "unsurveillable absolute anonymous communications
> > systems", the prevalence of evil on them would be the same as the
> > overall prevalence of evil. Right? Those who play on the supposed
> > association of Tor with evil are not friends of freedom.
> >
> >> It also would seem to raise serious questions about whether such efforts
> >> should be supported
> >
> > If you choose to support Tor, then do. If you don't, then don't. Others
> > can make their own choices, based on their principles and values.
> >
> >> --and, to raise questions raised in other threads here, whether ISPs and
> >> other service providers and websites should let Tor relays through.
> >
> > There are more-effective solutions that don't hurt the innocent.
> >
> >> Note that if you are correct, you are painting an extremely dark picture
> >> of our political future, in which constitutional governance and rule of
> >> law become, strictly speaking, impossible. You may think that this will
> >> decrease the amount of evil in the world. My reading of world history
> >> suggests otherwise.
> >
> > It should be obvious that I'm no statist. But discussions of politics
> > are off-topic on this list. So I'll not address the rest of your post.
> >
> > <SNIP>
> > --
> > tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
> > To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
> > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>
> --
> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

