Re: [security-discuss] Freedom 0: the utilitarian vs. the deontologist

[Anonymous]

Alfred M. Szmidt said:

>    > Regardless of whether it's due to not having an account, due to
>    > your proxy being blocked or due to user incompetence, your
>    > ability to access the data had nothing to do with your freedom to
>    > use the software.
> 
>    Of course it does.  It's already been established that "stopping"
>    someone using wget in the manner they want suppresses freedom 0.
>    Here you're just stating the contrary position without actually
>    countering what you've quoted.
> 
> Freedom 0 does not give you a right to access someone elses software
> on a different machine.  It only gives you the right to use the
> software that you _already_ have, on _your_ machine.  That is all
> Freedom 0 says.

This doesn't counter the text you've replied to.  There is no
server-side exemption for /stopping/ someones use of their software on
thier own machine.

>    > You want to download from gnuradio.org using wget.
> 
>    Not just that.  I want to download from gnuradio.org using wget to
>    proxy over Tor.
> 
> Something that works.

It's been proven not to:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2017-03/msg00116.html

And again, you're not listening.  You continue to model your arguments
after child-like bickering, by reposting and reposting a statement of
position without addressing the evidence that has already defeated
your claim (twice in this case).

It's also fallacy of repetition.  It's also intellectual dishonesty to
post bogus shell output, which can only fool people who don't use Tor.
You posted the misinfo without thinking to add "torsocks" after
pasting, and to fabricate the download time to resemble that of a tor
circuit, and you got caught.  It's really a bad idea when anyone with
Tor can easily verify that the DoS is still in force as I write this
(March 10th).

--
Please note this was sent anonymously, so the "From:" address will be unusable.
List archives will be monitored.