Daniel Cheng wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Ximin Luo <xl269 at cam.ac.uk> wrote: >> Ian Clarke wrote: >>> The Guardian has an article, the product of an interview I did a few >>> weeks ago, read it here: >>> >>> >>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/26/dark-side-internet-freenet >>> >>> You can read my public response here: >>> http://blog.locut.us/main/2009/11/25/the-guardian-writes-about-freenet.html >>> >>> I think there is a chance my response could get some attention, so I'd >>> appreciate feedback/proofreading, but please be quick! >>> >>> Ian. >> The article caption reads completely differently from the article text. This: >> >> "Freenet software allows users complete anonymity as they share viruses, >> criminal contacts and child pornography" >> >> is practically libel. And quite offensive, actually. > > Technically, it is not libel -- freenet does allow sharing /anything/ > share anonymously. > > I think it is important to highlight the legitimate/good use of anonymity. > Citing the benefits of wikileak have bring maybe a good start. > > Pointing to "censor-monitors" /sounds/ like a conspiracy theory.
hmm, really? it's already happening in several countries, and stuff similar to it is being pushed even in the US and the UK. > >> I think it's important to point out that censor-monitors abusing their power >> (which is what Freenet is designed to counteract) is far scarier and a much >> bigger problem than a couple of paedophiles looking at kiddie porn. It's the >> whole blowing-things-out-of-proportion / fear-mongering thing. >> >> X >> > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
