[Commotion-discuss] concerns about the NYT / mo jo mesh articles

[L. Aaron Kaplan]

On Nov 14, 2013, at 9:00 PM, Anthony Townsend <amt3 at nyu.edu> wrote:

> i agree - great this is being seen as a movement.
> 
> is anyone else disturbed by the trend towards painting this as a potential threat to national security? you are all a bunch of renegades trying to hide from the NSA?
> 

I am.
I don't see myself as a renegade. Rather more of a researcher in this field.

> whether that’s true or not, its an incredibly sensational angle and creates the potential for serious backlash. when i read both of these articles in my mind i immediately saw Verizon lobbyists descending on Trenton with re-prints and legislation blocking mesh networks attached. 
> 
> maybe I’m paranoid but this reminds me very much of the days when NYCwireless were being called “wireless pirates” even though we weren’t doing anything illegal. then Philly, then all the steakhouse bans on muni.
> 
> maybe this is not the place for it, but just wanted to raise a counterpoint to all the high-5ing

Well it is clear that the journalist created a sensationalist article, put us all into one box and said "they work against NSA spying". Of course that is B*S.
I am not worried about any backlash, but I am disturbed that my quotation ended up in an article which has an overall message that I can not sign up to. 
Currently, these mesh networks would not be secure against any serious attack whatsoever. Nor would the users of these networks be able to handle any targeted attack.
The article is not only sensationalist but also technically wrong.

Not sure what disturbs me more.

a.




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/commotion-discuss/attachments/20131120/9789a2c4/attachment.sig>