On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 11:27:41AM -0700, michael wrote:
> 
> So what we someone came up with a tool to do this kind of searching
> and indexing, and the query of the index could be run on your local
> node? The indexes themselves could be distributed as content within
> freenet (so you're not compromising anonymity by using them) and since
> the indexes are inserted under a certain key, they'd be no more or
> less vulnerable to poisoning than trusting one of the existing index
> sites. Instead of going to tfe's page each day, you'd grab your search
> index from tfe and perform your keyword search on your local node.
> Am I missing something obvious here?

That is the way to go, when things get big. More convenient than the
sites perhaps, but not more secure. Although you could combine several
anonymously inserted indexes using one client. Oh, and it's likely to be
pretty slow unless the indexes are so small that you can fetch the whole
thing every day.
> 
> -michael
> 
> Some Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > {
> > it seems to me that freenet will only become really
> > useful for p2p 
> > filesharing with and index and way to seach freenet. 
> > I think this has 
> > sort-of been tried before, but what if built into the
> > freenet node was a way 
> > to index every key inserted, in an index key.  if a
> > search mechanism was 
> > also built into the node, then freenet would suddenly
> > become useful to the 
> > "average joe" end user, which surely must be one of
> > your goals - freedom of 
> > speech is useless if noone can hear you.
> > } From Ian Cullinan
> >
> > Yeah, well you might want to check this out if you
> > haven't already:
> > http://www.freenet.org.nz/search/
> > I not sure who made it, but it seems to be running a
> > node sniffing out content and maintaining indexs for
> > text searches.  The obvious problem is that it you
> > give up your anonymity when you use it.  I think what
> > he is suggesting is to make a tool which does this
> > that most users could run locally.
> >
> > The problem I see is that it cann't be a completely
> > 3rd party tool because of the way the keys are layed
> > out.  You're not supposed to be able to read what's in
> > your data store, because it's encrypted so you have no
> > liablity.  Fred does know what a key is when a request
> > comes in for a key, but Fred tells no one and drops
> > this information.  Someone would have to build little
> > sniffer hooks into Fred to make this possible.
> >
> > I do agree that this kind of feature would be cool. 
> > Right now freenet seems to be where the web was before
> > yahoo.  You had to surf a graph to try to find what
> > you need.
> >
> > Toad, I agree there will be some kind of advesary
> > tring to flood any search system full of junk.  Still
> > I think if a node sits there and passivly listens to
> > which keys are requested it can estimate how popular
> > items are, and that the junk wouldn't be as popular as
> > the good stuff.  One could also use the old google
> > algorithm where you build a graph to determine how
> > popular a page is by seeing how many "good" pages link
> > to it.
> >
> > The big question is should/can this be done by every
> > node or some trusted authorities (which the user can
> > select) building an indecies.  People at google make
> > good money doing this and do it well, but at the same
> > time the web offers up (too?) much power to them.  
> >
> > I sure you could say the same for that main page that
> > tries to link in all freesites.  I see no difference
> > trust wise in relieing on some main page(s) or some
> > index(s) which are maintain by a trusted few.  When
> > that list of freesites grows into the tens of
> > thousands, we'll have to replace it with something
> > better.
> >
> > Chris
> _______________________________________________
> devl mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

-- 
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to