3 ms·
> Isn't this exactly what someone would have said about the NSA spying on us even just a few months back? Did we learn from that AT ALL or just anytime we don't
by thex86 13y ago
> Isn't this exactly what someone would have said about the NSA spying on us even just a few months back? Did we learn from that AT ALL or just anytime we don't like a theory we will call that person a tin foil hat wearing nutcase?
The NSA is a different case. We do not know anything about it, except from the leaks. But we do know things about Tor.
a). Actively developed, follows the best principles possible. Open discussions in IRC, active mailing list, developers who respond to queries.
b). Highly researched by some of the best universities in the world. Cambridge and Waterloo come to mind instantly.
c). There has not been a single case of mistrust on their part that should make someone suspicious about them.
The day Tor does something like this, not only they lose their funding, they lose users and they become a dead project. With so much reputation at stake -- and they are respected people in the community -- Dingledine and Mathewson doing something like this? I don't think so.
- ryguytilidie 13y agoSure, I understand that, but if that is the argument, just make those three points. Arguing "Because conspiracy theories are not only stupid, they are annoying. This issue has been addressed on the tor-talk list many times. Please show one iota of proof." is just silly, as though because we don't have factual proof the government is doing something wrong we are "stupid and annoying". All I'm saying is that this argument lacks a ton of credibility in a world where we just found out our own government spies on everything we do and the reaction from the mainstream went from "those tin foil hat wearing morons!" to "eh, they were right, and I was wrong, why would that possibly make me change my beliefs?".