>
> Seems to me that the purpose of free speech, basic human rights and so
> forth is better served by discussing ideas with people rather than
> creating secure channels of anonymous file distribution.
>
> CHEERS> SAM
>
How are you supposed to even discuss free speech if every time
you try someone censors you?
> Clearly any technology can be used for good or bad. One of
> the things with Freenet that distinguishes it from some others,
> is that when I use it I am putting resources into a common pool
> (I guess I can set my local cache size to zero), and although
> some of those resources get used for good things, others get
> used for bad.
Essentially, the community decides what is a "good" or a "bad"
use of the network -- by using it.
The part of Freenet which interests me though, is that Freenet
is a kind of experiment in *individual* democracy, not social
democracy. I think this scares a lot of people. How will people
behave on a network (not freaks, but the "moral majority") in
the absence of public censure? Without the tyranny of their peers?
I am fascinated enough by this to want Freenet to happen. Even
if it means that we're all running a distributed pr0n network ;-)
Cheers,
Blair.
--
The truth that is suppressed by friends
is the readiest weapon of the enemy.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
----------
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential
and is intended for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) only.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and
may not necessarily reflect the views of Chelmer Limited.
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
