On Thursday, October 15, 2015 06:33:15 PM Florent Daigniere wrote: > Is "pretending that Opennet can work" still the official project's > line?
What is it you request here? A) Remove Opennet? B) Keep Opennet but improve Darknet features? This could be things such as finishing the code to establish connections to friends of friends. If it is A: Is pretending that average humans will know enough Freenet users to make pure Darknet work a reasonable estimate? Is it acceptable to limit freedom of speech to those who have many friends? Users for sure won't accept modem speed in the age of upcoming GBit cellphone networks. Is it acceptable to limit freedom of speech to those who want perfect security; instead of also providing it to those who accept medium security? Isn't it enough that we allow people to disable Opennet if they don't want it? Isn't "pretending that Opennet can work" already proven since it in fact does work? I haven't heard of people get legally convicted thanks to Opennet security issues. If it is B: Yes, it'd be nice to improve Darknet. I think finishing the FOAF code would be a good idea, given that it is half- finished already anyway. However, I think we've spent too much time upon core work while neglecting deployment (Debian packages) and client applications; so this should only be done if a volunteer steps up to do it, not something which we can do with the limited funds we have.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
