The point is we should keep in mind that although freenet gives a user a better degree of anonymity it's just a distributed information network.
Anonymity should be treated as a side effect of this, not the central feature. What keeps information free is it's out of control of a single user. The FBI or whatever agency can still nail you if they wanted to, but that'll just take down one node out of millions. Recognizing this, if an illegal site *was* allowed to point to a single node as an entry point, this would have the same deniability as the central hub to a wan. It passes information - some illegal, some not. It turns a blind eye to the information. This is deniability. If someone stashed a ton of cocaine in a supermarket and everone was notified of this, the owners of the supermarket would most likely be held accountable since they maintain their market and are expected to not distribute drugs from it. They must report it to the police immediately to not get in trouble. Our situation is more like having a huge warehouse. Millions of people go in and out every day. Who knows if something in it is illegal. The owners have little to no control over it. This is the deniability we should center on. Play with encryption all you want. I dont think it's going to help. -Larry _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
