In my opinion, it's telling that the Tor Project has decided to post about this.
It's an open secret -- in other words, not even a secret -- that Tor and various other darknet and overlay networks contain, among other kinds of material, content that has been driven underground because of the risks it presents to its promulgators on the aboveground net. Depictions of actual child sex abuse, one of the most widely condemned sorts of material in a way that's nearly universal across societies, has been present on Tor-reachable hidden services for years, and the Tor Project seldom writes about this; it's simply accepted as a risk of the style of technology, much to the chagrin and moral unease of people everwhere.
Clearly they are addressing a recent development about a particular website, with relevance to the United States and its current struggle that was brought to forefront in the past week. The Project sought to publicize their stance to leave no doubts, but was this not something that ought to have been abundantly clear to a sufficiently objective observer? Doesn't the fact that a US nonprofit tending to a piece of networking software decides to weigh in on the matter of a single hidden service currently in the spotlight reveal something troubling about the pressures of public opinion in the US today?
It's an open secret -- in other words, not even a secret -- that Tor and various other darknet and overlay networks contain, among other kinds of material, content that has been driven underground because of the risks it presents to its promulgators on the aboveground net. Depictions of actual child sex abuse, one of the most widely condemned sorts of material in a way that's nearly universal across societies, has been present on Tor-reachable hidden services for years, and the Tor Project seldom writes about this; it's simply accepted as a risk of the style of technology, much to the chagrin and moral unease of people everwhere.
Clearly they are addressing a recent development about a particular website, with relevance to the United States and its current struggle that was brought to forefront in the past week. The Project sought to publicize their stance to leave no doubts, but was this not something that ought to have been abundantly clear to a sufficiently objective observer? Doesn't the fact that a US nonprofit tending to a piece of networking software decides to weigh in on the matter of a single hidden service currently in the spotlight reveal something troubling about the pressures of public opinion in the US today?