Search Mailing List Archives

Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[liberationtech] Google Unveils Tools to Access Web From Repressive Countries |

Shava Nerad shava23 at
Wed Oct 23 08:53:09 PDT 2013

I am with Jill -- and I wish more of the press and sponsors took that
attitude.  Lantern has good expectations I think specified on their site,
and so does Tor.

But if you look at the press or boosters or detractors, there is
misinformation, disinfo, and just a lot of glitter and FUD out there.

Not to jump on TechPresident, but to use them as an example (but because it
was posted here...), there's a tendency to pit groups against one another,
too, which is freaking sad.

>From their headline:  ""Could State Department Funded Lantern Be Bigger,
Better Tor?"

That's their font, for those with rich text email.  Please see my comment
on the article, which I believe was measured and compassionate.  I like
TechPresident a lot (hi, Micah! :).

But we are not sports teams.  Yes we compete for the same grant pool, but
ideally there is enough -- we are small groups and really, we are competing
for attention with other domains that are seeking funding from the State
Department that are not as strong as Internet Freedom.  If we do well, that
pool of money will be larger next year.  I hope all our projects find good
niches and learn good lessons in this space -- it's relatively very new.

No haystacks.  Other than that, let deliberate people of good faith, good
science, and good communication do well.

I'd like to see fewer people suffering for their work for freedom in the
field, myself -- I know this is a broad coalition, and not all of it is
"liberation" in motivation.  But it bothers me when journalists and
sponsors put territoriality in front of liberation when ideally they are
attracted to us as liberation workers in the first place?  (well, when they
aren't coming at us as facilitators of child porn and drug mongerers...  or
rebels who must hate the state, the NSA, law enforcement, the military,..
Do you know I have had stalkers who think I must be something very much
like Lisbeth Salander?  Twenty something, dour, kinky, something like
Trinity out of the Matrix, sociopathic, criminally minded, etc.?  Because I
started Tor..  They obviously don't read.. My were they -- three of them,
so far -- surprised.. sigh)

Tech President is trying to get away from the "horse race" election focus
in their political writing, but look -- the language permeates every part
of our culture.  We promote game mechanics and send liberation to the

The same here.  I didn't join this league to play futbol, even if I did
incorporate a nonprofit named Tor. ;)

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jillian C. York <jilliancyork at>wrote:

> "The more the merrier" is one thing.  Making safety and security promises
> about a given circumvention tool is another.
> I accept that some circumvention tools are insecure, *if and only if* the
> developers disclose that information and make no false promises about what
> their tool can provide.
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Eric S Johnson <crates at>wrote:
>> Without answering Jillian’s question directly, I have to say: “the more,
>> the merrier.”****
>> ** **
>> Right now, in cybercensored countries, it’s true many folks (though far
>> from all) have heard about one or more cybercircumvention tools. But most
>> folks’ attempts to use them are not entirely successful, either because**
>> **
>> **·        **their proxies are blocked too, or****
>> **·        **the proxy to which they can get access is overloaded.****
>> At this point, the need for more proxies to solve these two problems is
>> far from exhausted.****
>> ** **
>> I still haven’t heard of any cases where someone’s been persecuted *because
>> they used a proxy*. I’m certainly not saying folks shouldn’t care about
>> anonymity, just remembering that for the vast majority of cybercensored
>> netizens, anonymity isn’t what they perceive to be the issue they face when
>> they browse; censorship is.****
>> ** **
>> Best,****
>> Eric****
>> OpenPGP<>:
>> 0x1AF7E6F2 ● Skype: oneota ● XMPP/OTR: berekum at ● Silent
>> Circle: +1 312 614-0159****
>> ** **
>> *From:* liberationtech-bounces at [mailto:
>> liberationtech-bounces at] *On Behalf Of *Jillian C. York
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 22, 2013 08.01
>> *To:* liberationtech
>> *Subject:* Re: [liberationtech] Google Unveils Tools to Access Web From
>> Repressive Countries |****
>> ** **
>> Since I already have more skepticism of Google Ideas and Jared Cohen than
>> I need, let me pose this question:****
>> ** **
>> With the understanding that uProxy provides no anonymity protections, *is
>> it providing anything that other circumvention tools do not already?*
>> What's unique about it?****
>> ** **
>> ** **
>> --
>> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
>> of list guidelines will get you moderated:
>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
>> companys at
> --
> *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your
> address books to: jilliancyork at or jillian at
> US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088
> site: <>* | *
> twitter: @jilliancyork* *
> "We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the
> seemingly impossible to become a reality" - *Vaclav Havel*
> --
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
> companys at


Shava Nerad
shava23 at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the liberationtech mailing list