> People don't download arbitrary files. Usually they have a small number > of interests. Every day Jane downloads the latest industrial music and > lesbian porn. Whatever. But SSK's provide a very elegant way for her to > go about it. Perhaps her client automatically checks a key in the > supspace--updates.day.year, for example--and says "Yes, Jane, there's > been a lot of new porn lately. I can get this, this, this..." That's > only possible with SSK's.
This is quite possible without SSKs, but you are right about trust. With SSKs you can have a moderated collection. This doesn't help with finding the latest files of a certain type, but it does help with finding the latest porn that Yolanda the keeper of the archive has uploaded. So you're basically running a Freenet "site". I personally hate sites. If I'm downloading a linux kernel, I want to get it from Linus himself, but if I was looking for, for instance, porn, then I would really hate to have to find porn "sites". There should just be a publically accessible porn directory (using KSKs, of course). Signatures are still good because I can have my client score items based on who signed them. Good material lets me find signators that let me find more good material. But the information should be filed under its genre, not its signator, in this case. I guess I've kind of gone on a tangent. All I'm saying is that for "generic" content when you want something but you don't care about who published it, you want a it to be primarily filed under content with the publisher being secondary. One way to do this that might be neat is to have KSKs which are redirects to SVKs. That way we wouldn't have to add a new field to the protocol for the Signature. That is another level of indirection, however, so it would be slower. _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
