Re: anonymous surfing
- From: Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 18:45:20 -0700 (MST)
traveler/thunderturd wrote:
>> There's only two reasons you'd keep using and touting these services
>> after the beating you've taken over it. You're either so completely
>> clueless you can't grasp basic concepts, or you have some other
>> motivation for making yourself look like a desperate, straw grabbing
>> clown in front of the whole online world.
>>
>> NOBODY is that clueless.
>
> I'm toughting them because I think they happen to be good value, and I
If your definition of value includes being lied to, promised things that
can't be delivered, sold to the highest bidder, monitored, tracked down,
censored, and having your privacy and security handed over to third
parties in places where it's not even necessary to file any paperwork to
compromise them, by someone too ashamed of themselves to show their face
in public, then you have a point.
Wait, let me check something.
Nope! None of that stuff appears under "value" in my copy of Webster's.
> don't see myself as having taken a "beating" over them. Anyone not
Exactly what someone who feels like they've been beaten up would say.
> listening to trolls by flakes like you can get the idea simply. Unlike
> you, I'm not favouring only one company (cotse) and trashing all the
Only one little problem with your childish accusations. Nobody recommended
or endorsed anyone. Nobody but you that is. Everything said here applies
evenly to ALL privacy and anonymity services. Readers are left to decide
who is lying and who isn't, armed with facts and common sense.
But thank you for doing exactly what I said you'd do, immediately
resorting to accusations rather than addressing any real issues, and
giving this anonymous poster that much more credibility. All kidding
aside, I really appreciate it. :)
> others as they come up. The ones I've mentioned aren't subject to gag
> orders and black boxes on thier servers, I think that's a point you
> can't get over.
They're not?
LOL!
Not only are they subject to it, it's EASIER. Anyone can look up laws in
various jurisdictions and see for themselves. They've been posted in
AP/APAS too. But here you are, telling a lie about something no matter how
stupid it makes you look, when the truth sounds better, and tossing
out even more baseless accusations.
Thanks for giving me even MORE credibility. :)
> As far as the how to's, they all have some write up telling you how they
> do what they deliver, either in thier forums, or on a seperate technical
> page on thier web site. So Flush off.
Is that right? So then you should have no trouble at all providing a link
or a cite. Just one would do. But for some strange reason all you've been
able to do since you suggested that these cites exist, and the laws of
physics cease to exist when you alone rent some drive space, is keep
claiming it. You've provided absolutely nothing of substance. Ever.
Now who should we believe? A nymhopping shill/troll, or people like Chaum
and Schneier?
Tough call. NOT!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: anonymous surfing
- From: thunderbird
- Re: anonymous surfing
- From: thunderbird
- Re: anonymous surfing
- Prev by Date: Re: attractiveness of targets
- Next by Date: Re: anonymous surfing
- Previous by thread: Re: anonymous surfing
- Next by thread: Re: anonymous surfing
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|