Difference between revisions of "Talk:Essay:Why Patriot Conservatives should use the Tor anonymous browser bundle"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by JDano (talk) to last revision by DavidB4)
m (Reverted edits by TheAmericanRedoubt (talk) to last revision by JDano)
 
Line 5: Line 5:
  
 
I do hope someone finds a way to stop packet tracing in TOR, but until they do, do you think it is even worth while?  Sure, you make them work for it, but if they get it in the end, all you've done is made them add you the list of "Darknet" suspects.--[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 12:34, 9 February 2016 (EST)
 
I do hope someone finds a way to stop packet tracing in TOR, but until they do, do you think it is even worth while?  Sure, you make them work for it, but if they get it in the end, all you've done is made them add you the list of "Darknet" suspects.--[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 12:34, 9 February 2016 (EST)
 +
 +
I am new here and still exploring my way around the landscape.  This article has a section with the title, "Quotes on the Need for Tails OS due to Unconstitutional Police State Surveillance".  That certainly caught my interest because I had not seen a documented direct connection between Unconstitutional surveillance and the Tails OS which is produced by the Tor Project.  Instead of finding more than one quote, there was just a 1928 quote on the need for privacy. 
 +
 +
Could somebody please explain the argument made in this essay to me?  We have terrible problems with terrorism and criminals seeking to evade United States scrutiny by using a "Darknet."  Someone is advocating doing more to hinder the preservation of society, so that a private computer infrastructure can be in place just in case society crumbles.  If the fall of civilization is not a guaranteed result, why not defend civilization (with privacy safeguards)?  Who is the intended audience for this essay? [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 02:05, 10 February 2016 (EST)

Latest revision as of 17:28, 31 March 2016

Hi, it looks like you've got an extra closing bracket after the link to AmRD in the second sentence.

I like the idea of TOR, but as I understand it, you cannot view all websites with it. Rather, my understanding (which could be wrong) is that a website must be created for and hosted in the TOR network, with it's own special "giberish" URL. Am I wrong? Also, I must question the security of TOR with the NSA's power, having a quantum computer, large staff, and incredible funding. These articles seem to agree with that concern of actual security [1] [2]. Maybe you or I could be in the 19% which can not be traced, but I must question how effective it really is.

I do hope someone finds a way to stop packet tracing in TOR, but until they do, do you think it is even worth while? Sure, you make them work for it, but if they get it in the end, all you've done is made them add you the list of "Darknet" suspects.--David B (talk) 12:34, 9 February 2016 (EST)

I am new here and still exploring my way around the landscape. This article has a section with the title, "Quotes on the Need for Tails OS due to Unconstitutional Police State Surveillance". That certainly caught my interest because I had not seen a documented direct connection between Unconstitutional surveillance and the Tails OS which is produced by the Tor Project. Instead of finding more than one quote, there was just a 1928 quote on the need for privacy.

Could somebody please explain the argument made in this essay to me? We have terrible problems with terrorism and criminals seeking to evade United States scrutiny by using a "Darknet." Someone is advocating doing more to hinder the preservation of society, so that a private computer infrastructure can be in place just in case society crumbles. If the fall of civilization is not a guaranteed result, why not defend civilization (with privacy safeguards)? Who is the intended audience for this essay? JDano (talk) 02:05, 10 February 2016 (EST)