On 16/11/14 17:30, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On 16/11/14 16:36, Ian Clarke wrote:
>> We're in an interesting situation. The world finally appears to really
>> care about the things that Freenet has been about from the very beginning a
>> decade and a half ago (most of the publicity back then viewed Freenet
>> through the prism of Napster and copyright infringement). People finally
>> care about anonymity, privacy, government monitoring, etc. We should be
>> able to capitalize on this but it will take work.
> And in the meantime every wannabe clone project gets all the funding,
> and we don't, because we're old news. Yeah.
>
> You need to look at Arne's work on a funding proposal ("Freenet for
> journalists"). IMHO to make a big difference, make some decent progress
> towards something we could call 1.0, we need $1M+, i.e. a team of paid
> devs for at least a year. As you mentioned earlier, Kickstarter is out -
> it takes a lot of design resources up front, we don't have goodies to
> give donors, and we're excluded anyway because of being a social network.
>
> http://127.0.0.1:8888/USK@s9sxY2cTJWHKRsTuBTkjrXW4HfzrdUlwFqft1mzV0Gs,2E4DOMYy-~zOdp8-5OQH2IcmLfey0AOIkms-73Mx2tI,AQACAAE/freenet-funding/40/
> (Is there an open gateway at the moment???)
>> Thoughts?
> Well, this summer we've made significant progress, some of which has
> been deployed:
> - The client layer rewrite. This will be deployed soon and will have a
> substantial positive impact on usability for serious users, as well as
> solving a number of long term problems like big freesite uploads.
> - The link length changes. These are already deployed and have greatly
> improved opennet performance, doubling the average data persistence time.
> - Xor is on the verge of solving two of the biggest
> usability-for-real-users issues with WoT.
>
> I agree that we need a new UI. I don't think I'm the person to do it,
> but it sounds like the Winterface project is making progress on this.
>
> Personally I think we should put some significant effort into security;
> any tweaks we do around the edges to boost opennet performance can
> probably be sabotaged fairly easily, and there are real enemies. That
> means 1) making darknet easy, 2) making darknet fast, 3) solving the
> Pitch Black attack and 4) implementing tunnels, both on opennet and
> darknet. A good tunnel implementation could give us better anonymity
> than Tor, at least in theory. There's lots we could do on performance
> but little point if we're relying on an easily-sabotaged opennet model.
>
> We have code for transport plugins, and it's very popular among the
> community, but it probably needs rewriting and would be a big project...
> I'm not convinced it's worthwhile given that it provides no practical
> benefit except for a few users with UDP blocked, and no real security
> benefit (even with darknet, p2p networks are detectable regardless of
> protocol).
>
> Sone needs some problems sorting out, making into an official plugin and
> so on. There's lots of stuff we could do to improve performance of chat
> apps and so on; IMHO making chat work consistently well over Freenet is
> a long-term research project, like search. :|
>
> The existing fred changes, the two main WoT changes (event pushing and
> progressive recalculation) and fixing Sone and making it official would
> be enough for a reasonably interesting 0.8 IMHO, certainly an
> improvement on 0.7.5; a bit better if it includes Winterface. But I have
> no idea what the timescale is for Winterface, the WoT work or Sone.
>
> This is IMHO. I've been out of it really for some time; I was fairly
> single-minded over summer. You should look at other people's roadmaps.
> But it's worth discussing.
Lets separate this out into another thread:I propose that we ship 0.8 with: - The existing client layer rewrite (the next build) and opennet improvements. - Progressive recalculation and event-pushing in WoT. - Winterface. - Sone as an official (but not bundled) plugin. - Any bug fixes we have time for. What needs to happen for this to be possible? What is the status of each of these components? (Of course there is a connection between this and the other issues - we'd like to ship 0.8 *and* milk it for donations by having a clear vision to propose to potential donors)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
