The cheap low risk node majority attack, pki, geoip, etc

[Charles]

This list degenerated into a shitshow for paranoid poseurs like Juan.
Un-subbing.

On 6/9/2016 5:28 AM, juan wrote:
> 
> 
> Steve Kinney 'asserted' :
> 
> "TOR is a two edged sword that can also be used
> against the National Interest, so the NSA thinks TOR stinks." 
> 
> 
> Steve Kinney is a charlatan who hasn't done basic research about tor and
> simply parrots bullshit he got from the 'main stream media'
> 
> 
> When informed about basic research showing tor's flaws Steve Kinney
> blantantly ignores it, because he is an intellectual fraud. 
> 
> And then he writes baseless bullshit like the stuff below.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/07/2016 06:59 PM, juan wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 18:51:25 -0400 Steve Kinney
>>>> <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 06/07/2016 04:09 PM, juan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> And of course, TOR can be up to 100% effective against 
>>>>>>>> adversaries who are /not/ top tier signals intelligence 
>>>>>>>> services.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which is not the point, motherfucker.
>>>>
>>>> So in other words, I'm right, you're wrong, and you know it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> What am I wrong about, exactly? You can re-read my previous 
>>>>> messages and notice all the stuff I said and you ignored.
>>>>
>>>>> Especially my first message explaining why tor is a scam.
> 
> The big error I see is your apparent belief that TOR should be able to
> do impossible things, and interpreting its failure to do so as
> evidence of malicious intent by its sponsors and developers.
> 
> Overly enthusiastic fans of tools like TOR promise "airtight
> security," because they believe that airtight security is possible.
> Overly enthusiastic critics of TOR and similar tools demand the same
> impossible performance, and consider anything less to be a betrayal of
> public trust.
> 
> One of the most effective ways to defeat a grass roots political
> adversary is to build and unleash opposing camps of True Believers to
> fight for and against a simplistic, misrepresented version of whatever
> the "unwelcome" advocates are trying to accomplish.  What makes this
> approach so effective is that people will do it ALL BY THEMSELVES in
> many instances; guiding them to do it harder, faster and better is no
> challenge at all if one has a budget for that.
> 
> I don't imagine that every outspoken critic of my little ideas is a
> paid enemy agent; I prefer a more evidence based brand of paranoia.
> To me, the tempest in TOR's teacup looks like a perfectly natural
> phenomenon, driven by false hope vs. harsh reality problems.  Everyone
> has a right to petition the Universe for redress of grievances against
> the laws of physics; this can even be productive, as and when it leads
> to an improved understanding of those laws.
> 
> :o)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>