1. We should use a single seednode, do an announcement through it to get
a set of initial connections, and then drop it.
+
Even if currently there is no script to download the seednodes
and block all the IP:port's, if we ever make any progress we have to
assume that THERE WILL BE.
And one seednode will help how, in that case, exactly? If it's easy to
block
a lot of seednodes, it's even more so to block one seednode. If you can't
anounce through it (say some dude in china) you don't get a set of
connections.
I mean, I understand the concept, and maybe it's not a bad idea, but your
additional 'safety concern' is not really adressed by moving from dozens
of
seednodes to one or two, on the contrary. If it gets blocked, it gets
blocked.
No, there would certainly not be one central seednode. That would be
much worse than the current situation. I think that quote is directed
towards #2...
Maybe I didn't understand you after all, then. What did you mean with one
seednode, then? Something in the lines of what the noob said? (Which, btw, I
think you misunderstood). I don't think his idea was all to bad. I think he
meant this: say, you have 200 seednodes, instead of putting them all up, you
chose randomnly 3 seednodes (or something) out the list and put them in the
download (for each download). Thus, all nodes that get installed get only 3
other nodes, from which they can get connections, but those nodes are chosen
at randomn and thus are different for each node, and thus won't overload.
2. We should allow the network to grow slowly by invitation, not via
slashdottings.
That's like saying there shouldn't be hunger in the world. Well, no, there
shouldn't, but such a remark is rather wishful thinking then anything
else.
Possibly.
Certainly. In fact, even today, we already produce more then enough food for
every person on the face of the planet, only the distribution (and the
willingness to distribute) isn't there.Some will think this is a pinko
remark again, but I'm not saying this to condemn it (well, maybe a bit ;-),
but it just shows the nature of humans: we work best for profit, and there
isn't much profit sending food to starving poor people on another continent.
If the government would subsidize human aid, there would be next to nothing
to distribute to those area's.
As in regard to Gmail; there people perceive a profit for themselves too: an
emailaccount that is fast, easy searchable, with a whopping 1 GB and for
free... If you can elevate Freenet to the status that it is perceived by the
public at large as being beneficial for themselves, then you might try the
invite-system. Alas, IMHO, it neither works good enough yet, nor has enough
mainstream recognition/hype/appeal yet, to be succesful in growing with an
invite system.
Our current appeal lies with people that are
the-government-is-after-me-paranoids, nerds that come for the technical
aspect of the project, free-speech fanatics and a handful of pedo's and
chinese (etc) dissidents (no link between the two). In fact, you only have
one normal, sane, intelligent and good-looking user: me.
;-)
Point being: you won't get broad appeal outside the slashdot crowd untill
the network is easy to use and good working, and offers content that the
public wants. Seen where the succes lies in other P2P systems, we all have a
good idea what content that is, exactly. Of course we wouldn't want to
promote any illegal behaviour like downloading copyrighted works, but it's a
simple observation that many P2P-systems are used for that, as our friend
Mr.Riaa already points out. It's also an observation that our network
doesn't offer that much content yet, and that it's not very good in
retrieving/inserting it anyway.
Fact is, we NEED slashdot. Not only for the influx of new users, but also
for the input of new money. We all know that, so whether we like that or
So that every two years we get slashdotted, raise maybe $4K, get 5000
new users, and the network collapses, and 4,800 of those users leave,
along with 200 of our existing users?
Hmm..yes, well, who's fault is it, that it's only every 2 years? I have said
many times before, that we should have brought out a 0.6 version much
sooner. It's beta, for christ sake, you don't have to wait untill it works
perfect. Yes, yes, it would be nice if the network worked much better, as
I've said myself, but it's not a matter of one every 6 months where the
network hasn't improved, and one after 2 years, where it works fantastic, is
it? After 2 years, the network STILL hasn't improved much. So, even if we do
it every 2 years, the network still sucks, plus you have the result of being
totally overwhelmed too, as you said.
Every six months may cause 2000 new users, which wouldn't overload the
network that much, which may cause not so many to leave, etc.
not, it's a basic fact that it has provided us with extra funds more then
once already. The moment you make a /. article, even if it's only for
asking
