[tor-teachers] tor-teachers Digest, Vol 2, Issue 14

Tue Oct 20 17:21:15 UTC 2015

Okay Alison.  Fine.  I really wasn't looking to pick a fight, so I'm not
going to address weird arguments about excluding Eric Schmidt from TOR. 
When hyperbole and extreme arguments rule, you have a tyranny of whoever
can produce the most extreme rhetoric. It's sophistry at its finest. 

I'll message you directly. 

Thanks,
Stephen

On 10/20/15 10:58 AM, tor-teachers-request at lists.torproject.org wrote:
> Send tor-teachers mailing list submissions to
> 	tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-teachers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	tor-teachers-request at lists.torproject.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	tor-teachers-owner at lists.torproject.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of tor-teachers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: tor teachers -- politics (Alison Macrina)
>    2. Re: Extra Presentations to add to Wiki (sajolida)
>    3. Re: tor-teachers Digest, Vol 2, Issue 13 (kbaegis)
>    4. Re: tor teachers -- politics (Hugo Maxwell Connery)
>    5. Re: tor-teachers - politics (Alison Macrina)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 14:31:15 +0000
> From: Alison Macrina <macrina at riseup.net>
> To: tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-teachers] tor teachers -- politics
> Message-ID: <56265033.6040800 at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Nathan of Guardian:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015, at 06:55 AM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
>>> Dear Nathan and everyone,
>>>
>>>> I think as a community of teachers and trainers, we'll have to all be
>>>> open to the fact that we are coming from very different backgrounds, and
>>>> working with very different communities. I don't think anyone is
>>>> actively trying to inject their own personal "P" politics into the list,
>>>> but I am sure many kinds of politics will come up, as an aspect of
>>>> empowering users who are working against a system that seeks to
>>>> disempower them.
>>> I'm totally on board with everything you've said excluding the very
>>> last bit here. Forgive me for going down the rabbit hole with you.
>>>
>>> We're not working against any system directly. Our efforts are not
>>> mere pushback. Sure, we hope to stop surveillance and censorship
>>> systems from harming Tor users. The crux here isn't just about
>>> protesting "the man" or a specific political party or something along
>>> those lines. Rather we've built an alternative and we're teaching
>>> people how to utilize it in their lives.
>>>
>>> The result is of course political and there is a question of how the
>>> new system embodies certain political ideals. In our new system we
>>> build on the radical politics of IP networking, we have a right to
>>> form and hold ideas without interference, we have a right to free
>>> speech and a right to read, we have anonymity of various kinds. We
>>> have this as an intentional outcome of strong cryptography where
>>> everyone is able to run or to use this new infrastructure. That isn't
>>> a matter of just being against a system, it is about iterating and
>>> changing the current systems, while also providing alternatives that
>>> coexist and which are capable of replacing older, less autonomy
>>> respecting, systems which are oppressive.
>>>
>> Here, here!
>>
> Thanks for this, Nathan and Jake.
>
> Alison
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:54:18 +0000
> From: sajolida <sajolida at pimienta.org>
> To: "List to be used by Tor teachers and trainers to build a
> 	community, circulate training materials and get feedback"
> 	<tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org>
> Subject: Re: [tor-teachers] Extra Presentations to add to Wiki
> Message-ID: <56262B6A.5040204 at pimienta.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Dylan Cooper:
>> Figured I'd move this to a new thread to see if anyone is willing to divide
>> some of the leftover presentations Alison referenced earlier[1] that have
>> been accumulated over time.
> Hi,
>
> First of all, let my introduce myself as I've been lurking on this list
> for a while but this is my first post. I'm working on Tails where I do
> most of the technical writing and a bit of UX too.
>
> I'm not exactly sure why you're mentioning this list of presentations
> from Tor but I thought I'd point you to the repository we have for our
> presentations about Tails if that can be useful:
>
>   - Online artifacts (source and HTML):
>     https://tails.boum.org/contribute/how/promote/material/slides/
>
>   - Git repository:
>     https://git-tails.immerda.ch/promotion-material/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 10:10:27 -0500
> From: kbaegis <kbaegis at gmail.com>
> To: tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-teachers] tor-teachers Digest, Vol 2, Issue 13
> Message-ID: <56265963.7090109 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Thanks for asking what I think Jacob,
>
> My personal stance is that when we start including political discussion
> we implicitly begin excluding people.  Rational people, given the same
> evidence, can reach the same conclusion.  Opinions simply don't work
> this way.  You can't cite a reference, or make argument based on agreed
> upon fact.  Well informed opinions, while based upon fact, imply a
> certain attachment to the idea. 
>
> Now let's play with an example:
>
> "The founders wanted a democracy."
>
> I think this is faulty decorum.  Has the above statement advanced the
> discussion in any meaningful way?  If there's a disagreement, is there
> any particular idea contained above that I can ask for a reference to
> formally refute or am I stuck arguing about the difference between a
> republic, democracy- and even more basically if a group of politicians
> can agree on /anything./  It's easy to state opinions which require no
> rigor or substance. 
>
> I think that it's chiefly about exclusion.  It seems sensible to me that
> TOR benefits from any member- not simply those who subscribe to a
> certain ideology.  You absolutely need a dominant culture in the
> development community.  That's sensible.  I would argue that this is
> counterproductive on the teaching front. 
>
> What does everyone else think? 
>
> All of this aside, I was hoping that we could create some coordination
> for classes.  Again, I already fly around the country teaching.  I'd
> love to be able to teach TOR as well.  I just need students. 
>
> Thanks,
> Stephen
>
> On 10/20/15 7:00 AM, tor-teachers-request at lists.torproject.org wrote:
>> I feel that if we don't understand the principles behind Tor, we may
>> have trouble teaching and evaluating related systems. The principles
>> behind Tor which are very political in most contexts are why we're
>> never going to see a backdoor inserted. Backdoor free crypto is a very
>> serious political stance in my view.
>>
>> I'd still like to know what the original poster meant by political in
>> the context of this mailing list. It seems that we should be open and
>> willing to hear this definition and to use it as a starting point.
>> there may be a set of people who consider themselves "non-political"
>> when teaching Tor and I'd like to ensure that we don't exclude them.
>> First though, I'd really like to hear what that means from someone who
>> feels this describes their views or desires for this list.
>>
>> All the best,
>> Jacob
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-teachers/attachments/20151020/8021f9a7/attachment-0001.html>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: 0xBA8FAE55.asc
> Type: application/pgp-keys
> Size: 3821 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-teachers/attachments/20151020/8021f9a7/attachment-0001.key>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 801 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-teachers/attachments/20151020/8021f9a7/attachment-0001.sig>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:17:35 +0000
> From: Hugo Maxwell Connery <hmco at env.dtu.dk>
> To: "tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org"
> 	<tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org>
> Subject: Re: [tor-teachers] tor teachers -- politics
> Message-ID:
> 	<6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED47008F91540 at ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi,
>
> I support the numerous points that Jacob has made, and 
> reiterate the call for the original poster to expand on what
> she or he meant by excluding politics from the list such that
> we can better understand the motivations which may be well 
> considered and thoughtful.
>
> I posit that most people who use tor eventually understand that 
> there is a political aspect to their use of tor.
>
> One may start using tor because it provides technical capabilities
> which one requires (censorship circumvention, anonymity etc.).
> I suggest that these persons will likely either directly understand
> the political implications of their use of tor, or become aware of this
> soon enough.
>
> There are other persons, myself included, who use tor *specifically*
> as a political statement.  I wish to support others in their right to read
> anonymously by joining the "anonymity set", and I wish to support 
> those who *need* anonymity due to oppressive political environments.  
> I suffer none of these oppressions, but by my actions express my solidarity 
> with those who do.  (And I believe that the watchers do not have a right
> to know what I read -- another political statement).
>
> I believe that it is important to understand the political background 
> so that, with this knowledge, one can tailor a presentation to the 
> audience.  Roger Dingledine made a great presentation (29C3 ?)
> in which he clearly describes the differing approach that he takes
> when talking about tor depending on the audience: students,
> activists, law enforcement, censors etc.
>
>> I feel that if we don't understand the principles behind Tor,
>> we may have trouble teaching and evaluating related systems. The
>> principles behind Tor which are very political in most contexts
>> are why we're never going to see a backdoor inserted. Backdoor
>> free crypto is a very serious political stance in my view.
> I agree, it is a serious political stance, and am rather upset that it is
> at the present time.
>
>> I'd still like to know what the original poster meant by
>> political in the context of this mailing list. It seems that
>> we should be open and willing to hear this definition and to
>> use it as a starting point.  there may be a set of people who
>> consider themselves "non-political" when teaching Tor and I'd
>> like to ensure that we don't exclude them.  First though, I'd
>> really like to hear what that means from someone who feels this
>> describes their views or desires for this list.
>>
>> All the best,
>> Jacob
> Regards,  Hugo
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:58:21 +0000
> From: Alison Macrina <macrina at riseup.net>
> To: tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-teachers] tor-teachers - politics
> Message-ID: <5626649D.60702 at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> kbaegis:
>> Thanks for asking what I think Jacob,
>>
>> My personal stance is that when we start including political discussion
>> we implicitly begin excluding people.  Rational people, given the same
>> evidence, can reach the same conclusion.  Opinions simply don't work
>> this way.  You can't cite a reference, or make argument based on agreed
>> upon fact.  Well informed opinions, while based upon fact, imply a
>> certain attachment to the idea. 
>>
>> Now let's play with an example:
>>
>> "The founders wanted a democracy."
>>
>> I think this is faulty decorum.  Has the above statement advanced the
>> discussion in any meaningful way?  If there's a disagreement, is there
>> any particular idea contained above that I can ask for a reference to
>> formally refute or am I stuck arguing about the difference between a
>> republic, democracy- and even more basically if a group of politicians
>> can agree on /anything./  It's easy to state opinions which require no
>> rigor or substance. 
> I'm having a hard time understanding your argument, and I totally
> disagree with the last assertion. The conversation that's already
> happened on this thread shows that the political opinions shared are
> hardly without rigor or substance. Personally, my rigorous political
> praxis is the very thing that led me to Tor in the first place.
>
> Who are you worried about excluding? The spies? The police? The ISPs?
> The advertisers? Eric Schmidt? Let them be excluded. Individuals who
> have political disagreements with other individuals on this list will
> not be rejected.
>
>> I think that it's chiefly about exclusion.  It seems sensible to me that
>> TOR benefits from any member- not simply those who subscribe to a
>> certain ideology.  You absolutely need a dominant culture in the
>> development community.  That's sensible.  I would argue that this is
>> counterproductive on the teaching front.
> What certain ideology is being espoused here? The people I've met within
> the Tor community have pretty widely varying political beliefs. I think
> I can reasonably say that what we *do* agree on is that the work itself
> is political.
>
> My full-time work is teaching privacy-enhancing technologies, mostly
> across the US. When I teach, I make it clear what is politically at
> stake -- that is, the internet that we all depend on is increasingly
> controlled by a handful of intelligence agencies and giant
> multi-national corporations, and this threatens many of our basic human
> rights. And for marginalized people, this is more than just a nuisance
> -- it's a matter of life and death. This is fundamentally about power
> and control vs autonomy. I don't know how to make an argument for Tor
> that excludes that, nor would I want to; it feels equivalent to someone
> saying "let's do something about climate collapse, but not make it
> political".
>
> Echoing what Kenneth said, I am personally wary of any argument for
> political neutrality. There is no such thing as 'apolitical'. As Desmond
> Tutu famously said, "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you
> have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on
> the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not
> appreciate your neutrality."
>
>
>> What does everyone else think? 
>>
>> All of this aside, I was hoping that we could create some coordination
>> for classes.  Again, I already fly around the country teaching.  I'd
>> love to be able to teach TOR as well.  I just need students. 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Stephen
> I responded to this inline in your earlier message. Which country are
> you flying around in? What are you already teaching? Where are you
> teaching? What strategies have you already tried in reaching folks who
> are interested in Tor?
>
> Alison
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-teachers mailing list
> tor-teachers at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-teachers
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of tor-teachers Digest, Vol 2, Issue 14
> *******************************************