Edward J. Huff:
> [If freenet-tech were "post only by members", I would gladly 

I hope I'm not coming across as hostile. I'm not trying to make you
go away or dismiss your ideas, and if I have come across as such it
is the fault of my own stupidity.

> By linking many different documents to the same random numbers, I
> expose the contradiction in the law, because the law now needs to
> treat the _same_ number in several different ways.  

OK, but with my caveat that if one can identify which random number
first caused the illegal file to be published, the fact that other
people have since used it in their own formulas will probably not
deter anyone from censoring it.

I'll concede that identifying that does not seem trivial.

> Because he gets a bad reputation, and everyone starts ignoring him.

Implementing this kind of thing is a challenge.

> You don't reveal the new formulas until after a delay so that it
> is likely that the new CHKs have been used in several new
> formulas.  In fact, you don't reveal the _first_ formula for a
> given document until after there are many different formulas
> available.

They may not care (my argument about jumping off cliffs.)
_______________________________________________
devl mailing list
devl at freenetproject.org
http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to