2 ms·

Agreed. I think one of the biggest benefits of such a fund is that it could employ a lawyer who could look at cases like this to determine who is "worthy" of r

Agreed. I think one of the biggest benefits of such a fund is that it could employ a lawyer who could look at cases like this to determine who is "worthy" of receiving funds. I don't want to be that guy, but all I know about this is that a guy claims that the child porn that was found was due to him running an exit node. I don't want to say the porn was his, but it's possible that the porn was his. I'd feel better about donating if I knew a lawyer had investigated and found his story to be credible. Hypothetically, what if it was his porn, and then internet raise 1000's of dollars for him and then have this info come out. I'd imagine most people would be like me and never donate to people like this again. After all who wants to knowingly help someone escape justice when they actually deserve jail time.

DrWhax 14y ago
There are already quite a few funds like that, torservers.net and noisetor.net are examples of that, both have lawyers on stand-by. I recommend donating to these folks to keep exit nodes online!
- chollida1 14y ago
  I did not know that. Thanks
smokeyj 14y ago
If TOR was used for sharing illegal files, would you stop supporting it? Seems like you would be against most technology with that mind set.
- chollida1 14y ago
  This comment confuses me. I never once took a stand for or against TOR. All I said was: 1) it would be useful to have independent verification of this and similar claims 2) The reason is that if people were fooled into supporting a child pornographer then they'd be less likely to donate to worthy causes in the future. I don't see how that's in anyway a debatable point:) Tor did not once come up in my reply. You really seem to be reaching for something to argue about here. Calm down:)
  - bcoates 14y ago
    A criminal operating through their own exit node, or even running an exit node at all, is a nonsense misunderstanding of how TOR works. Combined with your jumping to the "think of the children!" example of a child pornographer, and your framing your argument in the form of concern trolling, it's hard to assume good faith of any kind on your part.
    - chollida1 14y ago
      > A criminal operating through their own exit node, or even running an exit node at all, is a nonsense misunderstanding of how TOR works. I assure you there is no misunderstanding on my part. > Combined with your jumping to the "think of the children!" example of a child pornographer, and your framing your argument in the form of concern trolling Umm, this was from the article, not me:) > it's hard to assume good faith of any kind on your part. Wow, I have no words..... just wow...
  - smokeyj 14y ago
    How do you see this playing out? "So, Mr.Node operator. Is that your child porn?"
    - chollida1 14y ago
      I don't see it playing out well for exit node operators. That's why I thought that a group to help pay legal fees for people like this was a good idea. I fully support TOR and would like to support people who run exit nodes and get sued by the government just for hosting exit nodes. What I don't want to support is people who personally collect and distribute child porn. Which is why independent verification of the claims by this new entity would be beneficial. I'm not sure how much clearer I can make this:)

DrWhax 14y ago

There are already quite a few funds like that, torservers.net and noisetor.net are examples of that, both have lawyers on stand-by. I recommend donating to these folks to keep exit nodes online!

chollida1 14y ago
I did not know that. Thanks

smokeyj 14y ago

If TOR was used for sharing illegal files, would you stop supporting it? Seems like you would be against most technology with that mind set.

chollida1 14y ago
This comment confuses me. I never once took a stand for or against TOR. All I said was: 1) it would be useful to have independent verification of this and similar claims 2) The reason is that if people were fooled into supporting a child pornographer then they'd be less likely to donate to worthy causes in the future. I don't see how that's in anyway a debatable point:) Tor did not once come up in my reply. You really seem to be reaching for something to argue about here. Calm down:)
- bcoates 14y ago
  A criminal operating through their own exit node, or even running an exit node at all, is a nonsense misunderstanding of how TOR works. Combined with your jumping to the "think of the children!" example of a child pornographer, and your framing your argument in the form of concern trolling, it's hard to assume good faith of any kind on your part.
  - chollida1 14y ago
    > A criminal operating through their own exit node, or even running an exit node at all, is a nonsense misunderstanding of how TOR works. I assure you there is no misunderstanding on my part. > Combined with your jumping to the "think of the children!" example of a child pornographer, and your framing your argument in the form of concern trolling Umm, this was from the article, not me:) > it's hard to assume good faith of any kind on your part. Wow, I have no words..... just wow...
- smokeyj 14y ago
  How do you see this playing out? "So, Mr.Node operator. Is that your child porn?"
  - chollida1 14y ago
    I don't see it playing out well for exit node operators. That's why I thought that a group to help pay legal fees for people like this was a good idea. I fully support TOR and would like to support people who run exit nodes and get sued by the government just for hosting exit nodes. What I don't want to support is people who personally collect and distribute child porn. Which is why independent verification of the claims by this new entity would be beneficial. I'm not sure how much clearer I can make this:)