On 15/11/14 23:44, Katya Titov wrote:
> I agree with everything you said, but the big issue I see is that the
> media is already using the term 'dark', and my impression is that once
> they think they are on to a good thing they will stick with it. It's
> hard to change these things. Think "hacker"
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 02:50:53AM -0800, Virgil Griffith wrote:
> Right now I perceive consensus in accepting the term "onion services"
> as a synonym for "hidden services", and when it's specifically a
> website, also suggesting the more specific term, "onion site".
For reasons I stated (separat
Right now I perceive consensus in accepting the term "onion services"
as a synonym for "hidden services", and when it's specifically a
website, also suggesting the more specific term, "onion site".
Cool. I support that. For nonnative speakers it might sometimes to
be useful to say "onion-site" t
Robert wrote
> Hacker wouldn't have the currency it has if a large part of the
> pudgy, pizza-eating photophobes didn't perpetuate it for dramatic
> self-interest.
>Katya wrote
>I really don't think comments like this help the situation.
Certainly.
I meant to highlight that the desire for loaded
"I" wrote:
> Katya, and all,
>
> So why don't we use sensible, plain language and stick to it
> to distuingish ourselves from them?
This article (German) has just been published which is quite
dispassionate and factual, avoiding hype. This is the type of
explanation and coverage that (I t
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014, Virgil Griffith wrote:
> If an expensive marketing company were trying to come up with a term to
> describe more anonymous networks such as .onion, even though "dark net"
> certainly fits, they would probably discourage it because of the reasons
> previously mentioned.
>
> I
Paolo Cardullo:
> On 15/11/14 08:42, Katya Titov wrote:
>> I opened a lengthy discussion about this in January:
>>
>> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-January/thread.html#31863
>>
>> No real outcome.
>>
>> The name is what it is, and I think it's stuck.
>
> Katia, thanks ver
Katya, and all,
So why don't we use sensible, plain language and stick to it to
distuingish ourselves from them?
Hacker wouldn't have the currency it has if a large part of the pudgy,
pizza-eating photophobes didn't perpetuate it for dramatic self-interest.
Robert
>>
>> I think the u
I think the problem is you can't use plain english.
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
On 11/15/2014 03:48 PM, I wrote:
> Good.
>
> ? tornet or torweb ?
Anything with "tor" is out, I think. Even though "location hidden
services" are in fact part of the tor package, while "Tor Browser" and
"Tor Cloud" are not. Still, using "or" as the prefix is more general
than "tor", and could app
On 15 Nov 2014, at 19:05, Philipp Winter wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 02:08:49PM -0300, hellekin wrote:
>> I use "onionspace" regularly, and find "onion service" and "onion site"
>> equally attractive. Just wanted to remind you that not all onion
>> services are websites.
> The term "onion s
Good.
? tornet or torweb ?
Robert
>>
>> -V
>
> How about "ornet" and/or "orweb"?
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
I like that because it is a simple and undramatic description which doesn't
encourage suspicion and hyperbole.
Robert
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 02:08:49PM -0300, hellekin wrote:
>> I use "onionspace" regularly, and find "onion service" and "onion site"
>> equally attractive. Just wanted to remi
On 15/11/14 08:42, Katya Titov wrote:
> I opened a lengthy discussion about this in January:
>
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2014-January/thread.html#31863
>
> No real outcome.
>
> The name is what it is, and I think it's stuck.
>
Katia, thanks very much for pointing to
On 11/15/2014 03:25 AM, Virgil Griffith wrote:
> If an expensive marketing company were trying to come up with a term to
> describe more anonymous networks such as .onion, even though "dark net"
> certainly fits, they would probably discourage it because of the reasons
> previously mentioned.
>
>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 02:08:49PM -0300, hellekin wrote:
> I use "onionspace" regularly, and find "onion service" and "onion site"
> equally attractive. Just wanted to remind you that not all onion
> services are websites.
The term "onion service" could supersede "hidden service" and an "onion
s
Roger Dingledine wrote:
> I'm pretty sure by now if you say "onion service" people will know what
> you mean, so that might be another vote in its favor.
onion service looks nice. Not all onion services are location hidden
servers. Some use it as an alternative domain.
--
tor-talk mailing list -
Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Virgil wrote:
>> "Turn your website into an onionsite"
>> "Access the onionsite in the same way you access a website"
>
>It could be technically consistent to say both "hidden services" and
>"onion sites" -- you could say that onion sites are web sites that are
>served
If an expensive marketing company were trying to come up with a term to
describe more anonymous networks such as .onion, even though "dark net"
certainly fits, they would probably discourage it because of the reasons
previously mentioned.
I don't like "deep web", and I think we can do better than
Paolo Cardullo:
> This was an interesting discussion.
>
> I was just thinking of starting a thread on why people use the
> appellative 'dark' as for 'dark net'. I found it quite disturbing and
> offensive, also in a racialised way.
>
> [...]
>
> I strongly disagree and I suggest to drop 'dark' f
On 11/14/2014 03:34 PM, Paolo Cardullo wrote:
> This was an interesting discussion.
>
> I was just thinking of starting a thread on why people use the
> appellative 'dark' as for 'dark net'. I found it quite disturbing and
> offensive, also in a racialised way.
>
> For example I have recently had
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This was an interesting discussion.
I was just thinking of starting a thread on why people use the
appellative 'dark' as for 'dark net'. I found it quite disturbing and
offensive, also in a racialised way.
For example I have recently had this argumen
I already often refer to www hidden services as “onion sites” when
introducing people to Tor, since that coincides with the one
user-facing attribute they have: the .onion TLD. Much less jargony for
non-technical users, and (as already noted) less ambiguous about what
exactly is "hidden".
Still no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I use "onionspace" regularly, and find "onion service" and "onion site"
equally attractive. Just wanted to remind you that not all onion
services are websites.
Indeed onion* has another couple of advantages hidden services: 1) it
doesn't sound so i
This is also nice because it further emphasizes the distinction
between the thing that the user is setting up and the network that
is providing secure/hidden/private/location-protected/whatever access to it.
'Onion service' to me doesn't as cleanly conceptually separate the
service that is protecte
> Onion sites sounds nice to me too. But we might have to change the
> name to from tor2web to onion2web.
I'm actually a big fan of onion service and onion sites. That is what
I have always called them when teaching people about Tor. I tend to
call the collection of all hidden services "onion l
Onion sites sounds nice to me too. But we might have to change the
name to from tor2web to onion2web.
-V
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Nathan Freitas writes:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014, at 11:38 PM, Virgil Griffith wrote:
>> > I'll start trying "onion service" and j
Nathan Freitas writes:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014, at 11:38 PM, Virgil Griffith wrote:
> > I'll start trying "onion service" and just see if it catches on.
>
> Since these things are mostly used for websites, why not call them
> "onion sites" or "onionsites"?
>
> Typical users don't talk about web
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014, at 11:38 PM, Virgil Griffith wrote:
> I'll start trying "onion service" and just see if it catches on.
Since these things are mostly used for websites, why not call them
"onion sites" or "onionsites"?
Typical users don't talk about web services, they talk about web sites
I'll start trying "onion service" and just see if it catches on.
-V
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 03:39:05PM -0800, Virgil Griffith wrote:
>> I am working on fixing up some aspects of tor2web. I've heard talk of
>> using the term "onion servi
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 03:39:05PM -0800, Virgil Griffith wrote:
> I am working on fixing up some aspects of tor2web. I've heard talk of
> using the term "onion service" or "tor service" instead of "hidden
> service". I actually like both of these better than "hidden service"
> (which I feel is t
I am working on fixing up some aspects of tor2web. I've heard talk of
using the term "onion service" or "tor service" instead of "hidden
service". I actually like both of these better than "hidden service"
(which I feel is too ambiguous about which aspects are
hidden/not-hidden).
However, I'm no
32 matches
Mail list logo
