| Author |
Do remailers deserve to remain in existence?
|
|
| Bill Snakeman 2005-08-22, 5:52 pm |
| Do remailers and programs like Tor and Privoxy have
legitimate uses?
What percentage of their use is for namecalling and
trolling, what percentage for criminal purposes, and
what percentage for legitimate actions such as
whistleblowing, discussion of 'taboo' subjects or
matters that would expose the poster to problems
with friends, co-workers, or his government?
Nobody can know precisely, but anybody who reads usenet
regularly can get a general idea by noting the content
of posts that come through remailers.
If you do that, I think it is clear that 95 percent of
remailer posts are namecalling and trolling.
Do the other five percent legitimize the use of
remailers?
Please discuss.
| |
|
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 22 Aug 2005 15:28:52 -0000, Bill Snakeman wrote in
Message-Id: <Y79R6DKW38586.9783796296@reece.net.au>:
> If you do that, I think it is clear that 95 percent of
> remailer posts are namecalling and trolling.
>
> Do the other five percent legitimize the use of
> remailers?
>
> Please discuss.
If the Internet was a place that provided anonymity by default, would
people click a button on their desktop that said "Make me traceable"?
Most people don't even realise that anonymity is an option, or perhaps
even that they are tractable without it. If they knew that everything
they said could be traced to their doorstep, would they say it in the
first place? Following on from that, would Usenet be a better place if
people couldn't say what they wanted to because it might be inflammatory?
I suggest that granting people the right to anonymity is a very good
thing. Of course there will be many people who abuse that right, but
that doesn't mean it should be taken away. In a democratic society
people have many rights that get abused but nobody would propose
solving those social problems by converting to a totalitarian state.
We could:
Ban football because the crowds misbehave
Reduce burglary by introducing nightly curfews
Limit cars to 60MPH to prevent speeding
Ban extreme sports because people can hurt themselves
And outlaw anonymity to stop people saying what they want to say
Fortunately we do none of these things (yet).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBQwn/22oLu9HNUqmMAQrZzAf/YvR+BNFgwuXa8PB92CUofgjcyW66rH0E
o8u2Yc54g50TvYNW66RMWcqaC2mRky0GVj6kB1IU
WX7UExyskTjabm5evSUcozF7
8I97seBmaBWmGz2DmtaWBrmGD2rihb0rjlFWWXcS
i2ksXgkOdhPM0I/5Gmk+2REc
V94C58NVteU3bcDiATBw6tW4cYedBfx+Lu/RiIrfJvtuXiKUFPtGoT2T041AOcal
dsxZDcRxy56CRtcWz2IzIzLv06DJiRqBvkSiALSo
33qm67NJoyTKI+xGsim47HHH
h9Sx+ndRkt9QP0k7zWwSe0m7PIrV3KDdL8/eo/HZ1F1vSgoGSJfFTQ==
=juGV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>
| |
| Philo D 2005-08-22, 5:52 pm |
|
> If you do that, I think it is clear that 95 percent of
> remailer posts are namecalling and trolling.
Which should clearly be illegal
| |
| Anonymous 2005-08-22, 5:52 pm |
| On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Philo D <doozy@earthling.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>Which should clearly be illegal
You can't be serious. You must be a troll.
If you are such a mind-shatteringly ignorant piece of dung that you believe
that the government should arrest or fine people for name calling or
trolling, then you should be put down to protect the integrity of the human
gene pool.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-08-22, 5:52 pm |
| In <220820051309595606%doozy@earthling.net.invalid>, doozy@earthling.net.invalid wrote:
>
>Which should clearly be illegal
I'm glad you're just being sarcastic,
Otherwise I'd have'ta beatya ta death with a NERF BAT!
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-08-22, 5:52 pm |
| Bill Snakeman <snakeman@snakeman.com> wrote:
> If you do that, I think it is clear that 95 percent of
> remailer posts are namecalling and trolling.
I would estimate a troll percentage of about 80 percent over all
human-initiated remailer traffic, not limited to usenet. And not counting
posts to alt.anonymous.messages, of course, as most of them are just
encrypted spam mails for nym receivers.
> Do the other five percent legitimize the use of
> remailers?
In my opinion as a remailer operator: Yes, absolutely.
Why? Because my messages are within those 5 to 20 percent. It's worth to put
up with the abuse we see if it's only for my messages to stay anonymous and
untraceable.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-08-22, 8:46 pm |
| In article <PL2HAQZK38587.2806365741@reece.net.au>
Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> Bill Snakeman <snakeman@snakeman.com> wrote:
>
>
> I would estimate a troll percentage of about 80 percent over all
> human-initiated remailer traffic, not limited to usenet. And not counting
> posts to alt.anonymous.messages, of course, as most of them are just
> encrypted spam mails for nym receivers.
>
>
> In my opinion as a remailer operator: Yes, absolutely.
And what Remailer do you operate?
>
> Why? Because my messages are within those 5 to 20 percent. It's worth to put
> up with the abuse we see if it's only for my messages to stay anonymous and
> untraceable.
| |
| [Anon] Mr. Tester 2005-08-23, 2:46 am |
| -----BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
Message-type: plaintext
In <decv4r$rp5$1@bananasplit.info> Zax <fleegle@bananasplit.info> wrote:
>=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
>Signature: 0xCD52A98C
>Date:
>Status: INVALID (Unknown)
>
>On 22 Aug 2005 15:28:52 -0000, Bill Snakeman wrote in
>Message-Id: <Y79R6DKW38586.9783796296@reece.net.au>:
>
>
>If the Internet was a place that provided anonymity by default, would
>people click a button on their desktop that said "Make me traceable"?
I think that MOST people would answer a question like that with something like
"Are you NUTS?"
>Most people don't even realise that anonymity is an option, or perhaps
>even that they are tractable without it. If they knew that everything
The problem there is that MOST people don't even know how much they don't know.
Most people also have no idea just how invasive "Black Hats" can be or that
govenernments can be just as much a "Black Hat" as anyone else.
>they said could be traced to their doorstep, would they say it in the
>first place? Following on from that, would Usenet be a better place if
>people couldn't say what they wanted to because it might be inflammatory?
>
>I suggest that granting people the right to anonymity is a very good
>thing. Of course there will be many people who abuse that right, but
>that doesn't mean it should be taken away. In a democratic society
>people have many rights that get abused but nobody would propose
>solving those social problems by converting to a totalitarian state.
Absolutely not. That's like using Anti-Matter to light a match.
>We could:
>Ban football because the crowds misbehave
>Reduce burglary by introducing nightly curfews
>Limit cars to 60MPH to prevent speeding
>Ban extreme sports because people can hurt themselves
>And outlaw anonymity to stop people saying what they want to say
>
>Fortunately we do none of these things (yet).
Yeah, yet. Best keep your eyes open though.
-----END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-08-23, 5:47 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Thrasher Remailer wrote:
> In article <PL2HAQZK38587.2806365741@reece.net.au>
> Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
<s>[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
> And what Remailer do you operate?
Can't you take him for his word? Remops have a right to be anonymous
also. Some remailers are even born out of a severe privacy need.
Thomas
- --
Life is like a videogame with no chance to win - ATR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQws0OAEP2l8iXKAJAQF7hQMcDtDAAqq5
uboGttTh6LyDAjuWnlETJbFN
A/+I6suiED34sF0BGIwdq4hLb5ZQNSqK/+xIICM+yEMJ1PUCYKzjv+M0ayNmugAR
CjnUiIUbxS2Og52XWO/r4X8tfxE6kVqnxRLdVg==
=D8Or
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-08-23, 5:47 pm |
| In article <430b33d5$0$11070$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
"Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Thrasher Remailer wrote:
> <s>
>
> Can't you take him for his word? Remops have a right to be anonymous
> also. Some remailers are even born out of a severe privacy need.
So, if I were to say "In my opinion as a Colo-Rectal Surgeon: Thomas
talks out of his arse" you would be quite happy with that because I
claimed I had a qualification that gives me a unique view on the topic?
| |
| Nomen Nescio 2005-08-23, 8:46 pm |
| In article <2011JTC538588.2665509259@reece.net.au>
Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> In article <430b33d5$0$11070$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
> "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
> So, if I were to say "In my opinion as a Colo-Rectal Surgeon: Thomas
> talks out of his arse" you would be quite happy with that because I
> claimed I had a qualification that gives me a unique view on the topic?
Thomas is sitting on your face? Ew.
| |
| Anonymous 2005-08-23, 8:46 pm |
| In article <2011JTC538588.2665509259@reece.net.au>
Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> In article <430b33d5$0$11070$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
> "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
> So, if I were to say "In my opinion as a Colo-Rectal Surgeon: Thomas
> talks out of his arse" you would be quite happy with that because I
> claimed I had a qualification that gives me a unique view on the topic?
>
I would be quite happy with that.
-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-08-24, 5:56 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Anonymous wrote:
> In article <2011JTC538588.2665509259@reece.net.au>
> Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> I would be quite happy with that.
See?
Thomas
- --
Life is like a videogame with no chance to win - ATR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQwyoTQEP2l8iXKAJAQGljQMgl4VMpwRo
alr4x0TdbDD3HwKLN60oMxvO
kjOuRY+YW9CU7j9Vdn9SeYsdstDGSF+grcvNAK6J
lhQlxej+2ZdPNLXJCRpNZ2QF
kBZESt9g9Ta0AEVp6s/Vy6f+r2LGT6b9XkNkjA==
=tcpe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|
|