Tor 0.2.2.14-alpha is out

[Flamsmark]

On 20 July 2010 03:14, Moritz Bartl <tor at wiredwings.com> wrote:
>
> Speaking on behalf of a good, blind friend: This is not true. Unless you
> consider him "not normal".
>

I don't want to get into the intricacies of interface design, and ableism,
but some points of note:
-blind people are not normal: they suffer from a disability that
differentiates them from others in terms of what they can do;
-the blind are hard to cater for with WIMP-type computer interfaces;
adapting interfaces for the blind is often a subsidiary - and difficult -
 task to basic interface design;
-most good CAPTCHAs like (reCAPTCHA) already incorporate accommodations for
blind users;

I agree that it's important to design computer systems and interfaces such
that they're accessible to those with disabilities. However, this should not
be at the expense of the system's core functionality: we should not allow
the great to be the enemy of the good. In this specific case, the point is
probably moot.

Spontaneuous idea: I think it might be interesting to use a fingerprint
> similar to the one caculated by Panopticlick to limit/influence the
> selection of bridge addresses.


Panopticlick uses a fingerprinting system that's quite effective against
individual web users, because of the way that we set our browsers up for
functionality. However, a malicious automated crawler can say whatever it
wants: whatever resolution, javascript, cookies, and flash settings it
wants. Using that type of fingerprinting would have little effect on a
malicious crawler, but would be extremely inconvenient for normal users.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20100720/85447a80/attachment.htm>