On 23 Mar 2002 at 9:26, Anonymous wrote:
Also, you have not distinguished clearly one of the main differences
between the Napster-type file sharing networks and what you are calling
storage-surface networks (what does surface mean here anyway?).
The difference is that in the latter you
Adam Back writes:
Here's something I wrote up the other night with my thoughts about the
differences between peer-to-peer networks vs the more ambitious
storage surface type propsals and the design criteria which one might
entertain designing against.
http://www.cypherspace.org/p2p/
On Friday, March 22, 2002, at 01:55 PM, Morlock Elloi wrote:
Sharing copyrighted material in order to get the same is the only working
example that I can see. If someone can point to reason why large number of
people would give a fuck about fighting censorship, enhancing privacy and
anonymity,
At 09:26 AM 3/23/2002 +0100, Anonymous wrote:
As far as the economics, one of the main lessons of the failure of Mojo
Nation was that Mojo didn't work, or perhaps you might say it worked too
well. It caused nothing but problems for the operators of the network.
People tried to horde it, they got
--
On 23 Mar 2002 at 9:26, Anonymous wrote:
Not all of these are still going but it shows that there is a
lot more in the P2P file sharing and publishing world than just
a few moldering old cypherpunk projects from the 90s. P2P has
really passed the cypherpunk world by.
As far as
Suggestions for more criteria welcome.
Motivation.
I cannot find a non-computer paradigm that relates to sharing in-house private
resources with unknown others. This maybe the the principal conceptual
obstacle. Outside irrelevantly low-numbered activist circles, masses just do
not want to
On Friday, March 22, 2002, at 01:55 PM, Morlock Elloi wrote:
Suggestions for more criteria welcome.
Motivation.
I cannot find a non-computer paradigm that relates to sharing in-house
private
resources with unknown others. This maybe the the principal conceptual
obstacle. Outside
