Matthew Toseland skrev: >> or not to use the >> network is an open question. Freenet as currently implemented doesn't >> play nice with laptops... maybe we should be more clear about that on >> the website. >> > > With big flashing warning signs? I wonder if there's any way to detect that > the user is running a laptop pre-install... or post-install for that > matter... :) Anyway even on a desktop we will still have poor uptime, so I > guess there's little point in nagging the user about it. > Check for a battery? ;) > To clarify for anyone who hasn't got the picture yet: > Low uptime is very bad for Freenet. > Low uptime darknet is nearly impossible for Freenet. > Poor connectivity is bad for Freenet. > Uncontrolled NATs and mobile nodes are bad for Freenet. > > To sum it up: > LAPTOPS ARE BAD FOR FREENET! > > 0.10, as currently planned, will help a bit, but even so, uptime is always > going to be a serious problem... Should we show a flashing warning sign if > our uptime is below some percentage? > > Shouldn't we just accept that fact that people are moving towards mobility, and that most likely won't change anytime soon? :). IPv6 will probably solve most of the NAT and IP issues with time. I doubt nagging the user about uptime will help anything. Do we really want to support people keeping their laptops online just to seed the Freenet network, compared to saving power (you know, lack of oil in the world, money for electricity, global heating, etc.) by turning it off? Can we morally justify that? Is Freenet that important? (I'm not saying it is or isn't, but think about it for a minute)
- Zero3
