I have no real agenda against freenet. I'm simply trying to tell you that your reading of the law is wrong. I'm not trying to scare people away from freenet. Because it's still perfectly safe to use. This situation can only occur if the feds are in a position to monitor all your personal incoming and out going traffic, and have the power to crack all 200 of your node to node communication encryption keys. Which, assuming they are high quality keys, is an imposable task even if you had access to the most powerful supercomputers on earth.
I'm not bored or trolling. I'm just trying to enlightening you to the fact that the law maybe blind, but it's not stupid. What's so hard to follow about my arguments? All I'm saying is that transmitting illegal material is (as crazy as this may sound) illegal, and the fact that you may not know with 100% certainty that your transmitting something illegal won't protect you. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 7:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] Showdown at the Freenode Coral Importance: Low Matthew Findley: what is your agenda here? Are you trying to scare people into not running Freenet? Are you trying to get the Freenet project disbanded? Are you trying to influence the priorities of the developers? If so, what are you trying to get them to do -- improve the code, or cripple it, or what? Or are you just really, really bored, and trolling us all? I really can't make sense of half your arguments. They don't seem to follow any coherent pattern. -- Greg Wooledge | "Truth belongs to everybody." [EMAIL PROTECTED] | - The Red Hot Chili Peppers http://wooledge.org/~greg/ | _______________________________________________ chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
