For what it's worth, I think there is some potential here. If Freenet were tweaked to favor performance slightly over cryptography and anonymous routing(I'm not suggesting we get rid of these things completely), it might be worth attempting to sell as a very cheap cloud service. There is a company, Space Monkey, that is employing this exact model - the difference between them and any other file sharing platform being that they distribute devices to their users, who end up paying very low prices for storage. It's interesting enough to me that, with a little bit of funding, I would like to help design and build a similar solution based on Freenet. In fact, Freenet might have an advantage over competing services because it's open source. Just a thought. There are people that I know I could pitch to and I can't be the only person on this list who can say that. Maybe then we wouldn't have the same time and money problems. :)
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Robert Hailey <robert at freenetproject.org>wrote: > > On 2013/07/22 (Jul), at 12:22 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > >> IMO, the company/service going away ranks pretty low in the > implementation concerns. > > > > This does happen in practice. See e.g. Wikileaks. Companies can and do > pull the plug on clients that cause press/political issues for them. > > What I meant, is that in the *worst case scenario* where: > > * we only use yubikeys, > * we use expiring certs, and > * yubico just pulled the plug on us > > Then our total investment has been: > (1) a 100%-reusable mechanism that delivers a string to a signing server > [and reports back], and > (2) a single (near-zero cost) API web-call that verifies the identifier > > ...and if we do nothing, "certificates" will expire and break down the > network. > > Then all we have to do is release an update with one change, that > certificates that expire after date-X (a value perhaps one month before > they pulled the plug) are considered valid. > > Next, we can write whatever other custom validation solution is required, > and regardless of the identifier (paypal receipt number, validation code, > bitcoin "from" address) we would already have the transport system needed > (just change the help text)... and we are not "heavily invested" in this > particular solution, nor have incurred a substantial disruption. > > > I'm sure there would be people who wouldn't want to go the yubikey route. > > > I would be surprised if there wasn't, but (from the user's perspective) it > is about as unsavory as "paying for freenet"... but you get a cool gadget! > > -- > Robert Hailey > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl >
