Re: [Help-gnunet] Measures Against Abuse not a topic of FAQ

[Stefan Huchler]

Dear Jan,

I am no representive of the GNUnet Project, but the whole point of
System of this is to shild the users from goverments and companies to
spy on the activities of the users.

If you give anybody the power of a backdoor or something similar to
search for unwanted activities, you cant limit it to "good" causes.

So if you built in a spy system or anything that makes it possible to
find a child rapist as example, you give the same entity lets say a
goverment also the tool to go after people with different political
views.

And as bad it is that such criminals do their thing, the alternative to
not give such tools out, would be the end of free press and therefor
democracy at all.

So in this sence, such technologies are important and you have to live
with the knowledge that bad people use them for bad stuff, too.

You should not blaime the tools for people doing bad stuff with it. Hell
americans even allow guns for everybody and encurage everybody to have
100 guns at their home, even they get used often for terrible crimes.
And the main purpose of weapons is to kill people and animals, while the
main purpose of GnuNet is not to do criminal stuff.

Again thats a private statement from me, I am not related to the GNUnet
project other than reading their Mailinglist.

Best Regards

Stefan Huchler

Jan Eichstaedt <address@hidden> writes:

> Dear GNUnet Project:
>
> The other day I asked "why are Measures Against Abuse not a topic of the
> project's FAQ?" When I describe the GNUnet to ordinary people (of
> different nationality and background) and then that I would like to help
> hacking on it, very similar questions arise:
>
> 'Wouldn't this be a perfect hiding-place or tool for <fill in
> descriptions of very bad people>?'
>
> I also had some conversation about this off-list (with people I only
> will disclose if they allow) of which the following is an attempt to
> summarize the current status of the question.
>
> The Question
>
> I would like to know whether the GNUnet Project already has or is
> planning on any measures against using the GNUnet in inhumane ways, i.e.
> using it to diminish human's "... right to life, liberty and security of
> person." (UN General Assembly, 1948, §3). Thus, by inhumane I mean any
> deed that is violating any of the human rights as adopted and proclaimed
> by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948.
>
> Please let me explain the wording of this question and why this is
> fitting to a project like the GNUnet. My usage of terms like abuse, good
> deeds, bad deeds and the like misled some. E.g., the word abuse led to:
> "... seem to all be of a commercial nature". Unfortunately, abuse does
> not stop there but goes way beyond. Thus, I now try to define what would
> be good or bad and abridge it by "humane' and 'inhumane' respectively.
>
> Because a p2p net would span multiple nations, this definition needs to
> be based on a broad consensus, i.e. across nations. The constitution and
> law of which particular nation should apply?
>
> A p2p net has so much positive potential (not defined on purpose)
> wouldn't it be great to diminish it's negative potential (see above for
> a definition)?
>
> The Answer,
>
> or the attempts on it so far, I leave out, for now, because I would like
> to know what people in the project are thinking. The outcome should be
> an answer in the FAQ.
>
>
> Best,
> Jan