Mailing List Archive

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Anthony wrote:

>> And my simple conclusion is this: Tor is slow. Really really
>> slow. It turns a 100ms page load into a page load that takes many
>> seconds, *if* it doesn't time out.
>
> Do you have the latest version? I'm getting fairly consistent page
> loads of less than a second right now. Maybe it's because of the exit
> node thing. But it seems to me like you must not have the latest
> version.

Yeah, I have the latest version. The speed issues are widely
experienced by many, many people. It's not just me. You seem to be lucky.

>> Even that is difficult though,
>> because you'll end up clicking a link that takes you to unsecure http
>> pages (such as a diff links), and before you can blink, your admin
>> cookie has gone across the web unencrypted. As far as I can see there
>> is no fool-proof way of using Tor with Wikipedia, except for maybe
>> blocking unencrypted http Wikipedia at a firewall level.
>
> Cookies don't get sent to the unsecure pages, and the diff links
> aren't unsecure.

Diff links are insecure. When someone puts a diff link onto a page, the
secure proxy does not edit that link to turn it into a secure link. As
for the cookies issue, I guess I was confusing myself because I am
logged onto en-wiki as well as the secure proxy.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFG8yQPvCEYTv+mBWcRAhaNAJ0bZVna3r2OXMPy4kxR21DE6VDq7wCghuqg
VM4BhxTy1DrSlZZ4d5MKAaU=
=2MG5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Brian McNeil wrote:
> Stalkers are not a nice thing to deal with and I think you're underplaying
> the seriousness of the issue. They may be no serious risk of physical threat
> and thus your comments about bodyguards are appropriate. However, you're not
> taking into account what it is like when you get death threats by email and
> snail-mail.
>

I don't think it's fair to imply that those of us who oppose specific
"anti-stalking" measures are somehow unfamiliar with the issue. Many of
us have experienced crazy people going on crusades and sending out
flurries of crazy and often threatening messages and/or phone calls. I'm
just more jaded about it, and consider it part of the cost of doing
business, so to speak, when dealing with electronic communications
systems. That sort of thing has been a part of the internet for as long
as I can remember, and the internet hasn't fallen apart because of it,
so people muddle through as always. Nobody came up with a way to solve
the problem on Usenet in the mid-1990s without making other things
worse, and I don't think you're going to come up with a magic solution
today on Wikipedia without breaking something else either.

-Mark


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 2007.09.15 13:16:18 -0400, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> scribbled 19 lines:
> On 9/15/07, Tim Starling <tstarling@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> >> On 9/15/07, Gwern Branwen <gwern0@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>In a very strong sense, we can 'safely' make no data available.
> >> This is a counter-productive over-statement. It is only true in the
> >> same sort of useless sense that many dramatic maxims are true in...
> [snip]
> >
> > Please keep the discussion civil, Greg.
>
> Tim, Your public admonishment to maintain civility is no less a breach
> of civility than my disagreement and admonishment to maintain a focus
> on our situation rather than spooky problems elsewhere.
>
> My apologies to Gwern if my tone was recieved as excessively harsh,
> for that was not my intention. I do think the background references
> would be useful to others, so thank you for that.

No, I wasn't bothered - I've been online long enough that my think skin disappeared a long time ago. I was more bothered that anyone thought I was wrong. :)

--
gwern
310 explicit UXO Merlin card CIA-DST TDYC AFSPC DDIS basement

Gwern Branwen wrote:
> No, I wasn't bothered - I've been online long enough that my think skin disappeared a long time ago. I was more bothered that anyone thought I was wrong. :)
>
It seems to me that a "think skin" is a reasonable path between "thick"
and "thin". :-)


Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 2007.10.07 11:32:16 -0700, Ray Saintonge <saintonge@telus.net> scribbled 9 lines:
> Gwern Branwen wrote:
> > No, I wasn't bothered - I've been online long enough that my think skin disappeared a long time ago. I was more bothered that anyone thought I was wrong. :)
> >
> It seems to me that a "think skin" is a reasonable path between "thick"
> and "thin". :-)
>
> Ec

One flame, two flame, or, Think blue, count two, etc.?

But this just goes to show that there's always a Golden Mean, eh?

--
gwern
NSIRL SASR SEAL MEU/SOCPSAC SURVIAC Meade KLM AKR data-haven 20755