For whatever it's worth, this seems to be a common model for a number of free VPN and Glype-style Web-based providers, who cater to clients attempting to get around content filtering. I've been interested in the mechanics and economics of the approach, but haven't yet had time to do any investigation.
*CDA* On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Jim <jimmy...@copper.net> wrote: > Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) wrote: > > Ok, modifying user traffic it's a tabu', but let's just consider for a > > moment how many useful things for the user and for the tor project could > > be done. > > Perhaps the user doesn't *want* those "useful" things done for him. > Perhaps he knows what he is doing and is already doing *exactly* what he > wants to do. Very slippery slope! > > (Not that I think there is a remote chance that such an exit node would > not be marked as a bad exit just on general principles. I just wanted > to point out that I find this "nanny state" attitude of "we know better > than you" offensive. It's bad enough when ISPs break NXDOMAIN, etc. > Although I doubt that you meant any harm. :-) > > Jim > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-talk mailing list > tor-talk@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk > -- *Collin David Anderson* averysmallbird.com | @cda | Washington, D.C.
_______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
