Re:Tor operator charged for child porn transmitted over his ...
by Hannan on Friday November 30, 2012 @05:03PM
(#4855705)
>> It's not possible to create a system which protects the and privacy of users with integrity, but not of criminals.
Do you have more information or references on this? It seems very intuitively correct to me, but I was hoping someone much more intelligent than me has actually formalized somehow.
Re:Tor operator charged for child porn transmitted over his ...
by erjiang on Friday November 30, 2012 @06:12PM
(#4855993)
Actually, just consider that illegality is defined by other humans, often arbitrarily.
A system that protects the privacy of users who have "American" free speech is simultaneously a system that protects "criminals" who violate blasphemy, royal-insult, obscenity, or any number of other laws in other countries.
Re:Tor operator charged for child porn transmitted over his ...
by mistercow on Friday November 30, 2012 @05:31PM
(#4855839)
I'm not sure there's any way to formalize it really. It follows pretty much in one step from the axiom "your computer doesn't know if you're scum or not". And if we had the strong AI needed to change that, we'd just be letting a computer invade our privacy and judge us instead of a human or government.
As regards Tor, it's extremely debatable that its existence has any impact at all on the distribution of child pornography. If you don't care about hurting people, there are way more effective ways to protect your anonymity than Tor.
In addition, Tor is an incredibly useful tool for fighting corruption in countries where online privacy would otherwise be non-existent.
So on the one hand it's a tool that gives anonymity to a group that already has it. On the other hand, it's a tool that aids in reducing human rights abuses across the board, including human trafficking.