Re: [perpass] Howdy!

[Dean Willis <[e-mail]>]

On Oct 8, 2013 1:30 PM, "Stephen Kent" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Dean,
>
> Here are responses to your comments:
>
>
>
> Too bad. We can try to minimize the impact, but a net that gets you
killed because
> the wrong person heard you say the wrong thing is worse than one with
slightly less bandwidth or temporal QoS.”
>
>
>
> I'm not sure I understand the context of your assertion re use of deadly
force. I assume you don't
> mean to suggest that many/most Internet users are in physical jeopardy as
a result of nation state surveillance, right? Is your argument that every
user of the Internet should incur performance and convenience penalties to
provide cover for the very, very tiny fraction of users who are in real,
physical jeopardy as a result of such surveillance? I don’t think that
those of us who develop Internet standards are in a position to make such
tradeoffs.

I mean to suggest that enough Internet users are, or will become, in
physical jeopardy as a result of their Internet use that we have a moral
and ethical responsibility to design the protocols of the Internet so as to
reasonably minimize that danger, even if it does have costs for all other
users of the Internet.

The extent to which we find the tradeoff reasonable is open to discussion,
but I believe we're currently being excessively miserly with our support.

-- 
Dean