This list degenerated into a shitshow for paranoid poseurs like Juan. Un-subbing.
On 6/9/2016 5:28 AM, juan wrote: > > > Steve Kinney 'asserted' : > > "TOR is a two edged sword that can also be used > against the National Interest, so the NSA thinks TOR stinks." > > > Steve Kinney is a charlatan who hasn't done basic research about tor and > simply parrots bullshit he got from the 'main stream media' > > > When informed about basic research showing tor's flaws Steve Kinney > blantantly ignores it, because he is an intellectual fraud. > > And then he writes baseless bullshit like the stuff below. > > > > > > > On 06/07/2016 06:59 PM, juan wrote: >>>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 18:51:25 -0400 Steve Kinney >>>> <ad...@pilobilus.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 06/07/2016 04:09 PM, juan wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>> And of course, TOR can be up to 100% effective against >>>>>>>> adversaries who are /not/ top tier signals intelligence >>>>>>>> services. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Which is not the point, motherfucker. >>>> >>>> So in other words, I'm right, you're wrong, and you know it >>>> >>>> >>>>> What am I wrong about, exactly? You can re-read my previous >>>>> messages and notice all the stuff I said and you ignored. >>>> >>>>> Especially my first message explaining why tor is a scam. > > The big error I see is your apparent belief that TOR should be able to > do impossible things, and interpreting its failure to do so as > evidence of malicious intent by its sponsors and developers. > > Overly enthusiastic fans of tools like TOR promise "airtight > security," because they believe that airtight security is possible. > Overly enthusiastic critics of TOR and similar tools demand the same > impossible performance, and consider anything less to be a betrayal of > public trust. > > One of the most effective ways to defeat a grass roots political > adversary is to build and unleash opposing camps of True Believers to > fight for and against a simplistic, misrepresented version of whatever > the "unwelcome" advocates are trying to accomplish. What makes this > approach so effective is that people will do it ALL BY THEMSELVES in > many instances; guiding them to do it harder, faster and better is no > challenge at all if one has a budget for that. > > I don't imagine that every outspoken critic of my little ideas is a > paid enemy agent; I prefer a more evidence based brand of paranoia. > To me, the tempest in TOR's teacup looks like a perfectly natural > phenomenon, driven by false hope vs. harsh reality problems. Everyone > has a right to petition the Universe for redress of grievances against > the laws of physics; this can even be productive, as and when it leads > to an improved understanding of those laws. > > :o) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
