|
|
|
|
|
by emodendroket
3046 days ago
|
|
That article is four years old. This claim I heard in an interview from him for his book that just came out (he got a bunch of e-mails through FOIA requests, as I understand it), and isn't addressed by this "very concise refutation." And some of the claims seem a little bit of a stretch (using the "Gate" suffix is a nod to Gamergate?
Isn't it more plausible that this is the same reference to Watergate that's been applied to every political scandal since 1973?). And it seems like that article mostly agrees with all the factual claims it examines but disagrees with the interpretation or their level of significance, rather than exposing anything as a falsehood. > That still doesn't contradict the fact that using Tor is better than not. Is it a fact? If Tor achieves nothing for someone trying to hide from the government except announcing that you have something you want to hide (is that the case? I don't pretend to be certain, but it seems possible) then I'm not sure it's better. |
|
He and I discussed them a bit on Twitter: https://twitter.com/itdaniher/status/961307347950940161
I was not impressed by his response.
The "bunch of emails" seemed remarkably banal. I've written similar emails about sponsored open-source work myself.
edit:
email stack 1: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4367176-Tor-BBG-corr...
email stack 2: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4367193-Tor-BBG-corr...