On Friday 09 April 2010 09:08:18 artur wrote: > Hi, > > Am 08.04.2010 17:42, schrieb Evan Daniel: > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Matthew Toseland > > <t...@amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > >> On Tuesday 06 April 2010 18:17:33 artur wrote: > ... > >> > >> On the other hand, Frost is broken by design, Freetalk will be integrated > >> in the node soon (how soon nobody knows), and if we put it back on the > >> homepage the spammer may come out of the woodwork. > >> > >> Anyone else have an opinion? > > Ok, Frost is spamable (like nearly every other communication system in > the internet). So, I would not call this "broken by design", but I know > which problems the spammer caused for frost.
In Freenet terms, spammable is broken by design. This is not people advertising black market pharmaceuticals. This is a deliberate and effective attempt to make the system completely unusable, at least on target boards. And it can be done anonymously, so the classic countermeasures of blacklisting IP addresses etc don't work. > > > I think if we link to it, we should support it, at least to a point. > > I'd rather we weren't. But, we seem to be doing that regardless, > > so... OTOH, I think we should have a messaging system of some sort, > > and that isn't yet Freetalk. And I don't know whether it's better to > > link to a messaging system that's so spammed it's unusable, or link to > > nothing. > > Do you support Freemail? Freesite? FMS? > Are you in one way or another connected to the content published on the > various index pages, linked in the default bookmarks? > I think the freenet authors do not want to associate them self with what > is on that pages. The way a search engine does not account them self > responsible for their search results... We are talking about software here. And no, we don't link directly to questionable material - we link to index sites e.g. that make it easy for users to find what they want to find. > > Frost is a good tool for Freenet. Without Frost, Freenet would have had > a lot of less active users, an so it would have today. > It has been the main communication tool within Freenet for years. > > Today there is a strong alternative with FMS, but I could argue that FMS > is brogen by design as well. When Freenet is all about anti censorship, > FMS is the tool to bring it back. I don't want to say it is bad, but it > has its own disadvantages. Freetalk and FMS both use a distributed reputation system supporting "negative trust". This makes it possible to block spam very effectively, because a new user who posts spam can be blocked by a few people who see it and then nobody will see the new user any more. There are alternatives that may be more acceptable, and implementing these will not be difficult - it's just not a priority for anyone actually working on this stuff at the moment. The main alternative is to have a "positive trust" system. This would mean that new users don't show up at all until the user has gained some trust from others, so we would need either new users to show up to everyone (meaning if a spammer is creating new identities to spam they have to be blocked one at a time by *each user*), or that they would show up to some subset of everyone - e.g. maybe the people whose captchas they solve and those who trust them. > > Frost is also a download manager. I was under the impression that the Frost download system was DoS'ed at the moment, i.e. out of action due to exploitation of the fact that it is fundamentally broken. > Fuqid might do a better job as a stand > alone tool, but it is not cross platform, has never been really Freenet > 0.7 compatible and its development has been abandoned. So use Thaw. It's a perfectly good download manager, even if you don't find the indexes easy to deal with. > (Just in comparison: Frost has had 17 Commits last month.) > And a good download tool is wanted by the community (1) There is no such thing at the moment, sadly. Frost certainly isn't it. Thaw isn't it. Maybe we will have a good download tool based on WoT sometime soon. > > Freetalk: Frost will also work as a Freetalk frontend. So, introducing > the more spam resistent freetalk will not make Frost obsolete. The > integration is not yet complete, but the basics have already been > implemented... Even if we bundle Frost, very few new users will realise it exists and therefore very few of them will use it. It is much better to have a chat system that is integrated and works out of the box. This is what the uservoice entry about "one UI for all" is about. > > (1) > http://freenet.uservoice.com/forums/8861-general/suggestions/156393-write-a-killer-file-sharing-application?ref=title > > > Cheers > > artur
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
