[tor-talk] tor project website change
grarpamp at gmail.com
Wed Apr 3 01:47:40 PDT 2019
> why adversaries should finance tor project and publicly it if they have
> a malicious intent?
Why do adversaries do that to their opponents?
Because it's a simple and effective diversion operation.
Nor is it dependant upon whether any "malicious intent".
Adversaries often fund their opponents to keep them busy and happy
even if opponent only a few steps tangent behind the race to actually
being able to kill the adversary. It can work actively...
"Here's a pile and stream of money to develop some useless
or thing we want in an RFP / contract / grant / employee",
or passively... "Hey, those guys seem to be going down useless
paths, ok here's a bunch of money to keep them happily digging
in those holes, LOL." Usually delivered by false fronts.
See also "regulatory capture" type of concept. Also how nice
salaries and simple weight of self reinforcing mass inertia and
groupthink over time can keep any one or group settled into the
same thing, less dynamism, up to even not abandoning and starting
out elsewhere due to simple risk aversion... "job food friends lifestyle."
Is an entity, product, or network subject to whatever
to some degree or other? Maybe, maybe not, others decide.
Yet without talking about and analysing harder questions
once in a while, especially as generations come and go,
people might have less sense therein.
If a site looks sexy it must be good, right?
That's what at least marketers think, and it's perhaps good enough
for browsing mundane TV news sites. Yet there's no frontpage
splash disclaimer for others with more sensitive, vulnerable,
or different use cases.
Nor mention of Tor people hypocritically trying to censor ban
nodes out of the consensus for, ironically, nothing more than
excercising their right to free speech. Instead of say punting that
out to meta analysis projects that users can choose to subscribe
to as suits their own likes, support, and thinking therein.
To be fair, no different than any other business (say ibm.com)
or opensource project... finding much suitability disclaimer
on anyone's pages, surely not without a good number of clicks,
it's of less interest or natural to cover some potentially
questionable areas, adversarial weaknesses, etc... it doesn't sell.
The last actual use case warning or disclaimer on torproject.org
was removed by or on October 10 2010. Some historical bisects..
first, domain 1998-01-29
same content actually to "circa" 2006
except for the gov diff
first, domain 2006-10-17
> what you said
It's really all junk lately, just delete it.
More information about the cypherpunks