4 ms·
>they need to be if they want their product to thrive. Otherwise, good bye Tor. The ironic thing is actually that by applying any kind of "network regulation"
by dublinben 11y ago
>they need to be if they want their product to thrive. Otherwise, good bye Tor.
The ironic thing is actually that by applying any kind of "network regulation" the Tor project would abandon its own primary purpose. The only way it can continue to exist is actually if it doesn't practice any kind of censorship of its users.
- scurvy 11y agoThis is a very simplistic, binary view of the world. Just because the Internet's view of a product differs from the author's, it doesn't make the Internet wrong. It means the author probably needs to step back and re-evaluate things. By your logic, gun owners would be able to shoot whatever they want. The primary purpose of a gun is to shoot things. To paraphrase: "To regulate what you can and can't shoot would go against the primary purpose of a gun and the gun manufacturers can't exist that way."
- yarrel 11y agoSomething working or not is a binary.