dark web briefest intro - was Re: educate me Please

[juan]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:52:28 -0400
z9wahqvh <z9wahqvh at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn at rushpost.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Maybe funded, as in past tense. The current Tor project is not
> > dependent at all on US government funding that I can see. If you
> > can prove otherwise, please post the proof.
> >
> 
> proof is right there on Tor's own site. 



	Thanks! So you did shawn quinn's homework =) I was expecting
	him to post the relevant data but of course expecting even a
	shred of intellectual honesty from shawn quinn is...very naive
	or, I admit, outright stupid. 


> there is still substantial US
> government funding. according to the Tor Project "Sponsors" page (
> https://www.torproject.org/about/sponsors.html.en), current funders
> include:
> 
> -- the Open Technology Fund (https://www.opentech.fund/page/faq), a
> subsidiary of the Broadcasting Board of Governors
> (http://www.bbg.gov/, https://www.bbg.gov/who-we-are/mission/), a
> long-time sponsor of Tor, and the US government agency that sponsors
> the various "Radio Free" projects and has deep ties to CIA and other
> parts of the intelligence apparatus; -- the National Science
> Foundation, the science funding body of the Federal government.
> 
> Other funders who might raise red flags due to relatively deep
> involved with both government and corporate power bases include SRI
> International, a non-profit that works closely with the US government
> on many projects, Media Democracy Fund, and Google.
> 
> of the direct US govt funders it is probably OTF that is most
> concerning & the one that's been discussed by journalists and others.
> OTF is a... very weird organization, and it's been the main target of
> those who've criticized Tor's funding, other than past direct
> military funding.
> 
> NSF is pretty basic-science oriented and the grants that funded those
> are publicly available & probably not for general operating funds.
> 
> also of note is that while that page says US State Dept funding ended
> in 2016, for some reason it remains listed under "Current sponsors."
> hard to tell what "current" means since the page isn't dated. at any
> rate, State was still a funder as of the latest annual Financial
> Report.
> 
> - z