Re: [Tech] Re: Crazy idea: How trust in darknets enables secure democratic censorship

You're ignoring the readers. And the testers.

On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 11:50:40AM -0400, Ken Snider wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> >Which is *definitionally* bad. Even though the lack of censorship means
> >the people who would most benefit from Freenet can't use it, only the
> >people who don't care (because they're entirely amoral), or think the
> >benefit outweighs the cost (because they're hardline libertarians like
> >us).
> 
> You keep saying that, I just don't see it as true.
> 
> If someone wants to use freenet to distribute "morally" sound but "legally" 
> unsound information, and needs it out there badly enough (think freedom 
> fighter, etc), they *will* use freenet, regardless of the moral quality of 
> the other content on the medium. To them, I believe it's likely that 
> they'll care more about the anonymity and reliability of the network, 
> rather than what else is in transit.
> 
> Ys, even *if* that means running a node that may otherwise carry 
> objectionable content (because, as you've pointed out, it'll likely not 
> only be illegal for them to run the node, but illegal for them to dissimate 
> their information. In that situation, are they *really* going to be worried 
> about CP charges?)
> 
> --Ken.
-- 
Matthew J Toseland - toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

_______________________________________________
chat mailing list
[email protected]
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFC1TpDHzsuOmVUoi0RAkQGAJ9XuC74eQwamHCKafU86mHjo2FPcQCfRQ2c
KnTj3c7ZEr+5pdfLqJiCWSA=
=k1Ic
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----