[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Hi, I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think about what would motivate someone... I remember when Ifound freenet,I installed itspent hours reading over the technical jargon. It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that does not work. Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this complicated process and after waitingfor three dayswith it on, it finally started working. The reason I spentmany hours and went back after throwing it outonce, was becauseI was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. Here's the problem: If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable beta test, why would anyone new bother to join the community? Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to beta test somerandom highly technical peer to peer application that completely hogs your computer's resources? The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. Aperson who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just get rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, etc. If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your user base. The onlyNEWusers you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that don't know about freenet already? So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser to just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be willing to helpcreate this website, and I'm sure many other people also would volunteer. Best Regards, Van ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
The installer for 0.7 is way better than the (unmaintained) installer for 0.5. And we simply don't have the resources to maintain both branches in any meaningful way. 0.7 is an unstable alpha test, but 0.5 isn't much better. In many ways 0.7's security is better *now*, and it will improve further. Admittedly in other ways it may be less secure, but I don't believe that 0.5 is significantly more secure than 0.7, even with the fake-darknet topology that we use for testing now (with a few real darknet links and lots of fake ones from #freenet-refs). Many of the more powerful attacks against 0.7, such as correlation attacks, were also viable against 0.5. And there is content. As far as initial speed goes, 0.5 takes a week to get up to something vaguely resembling speed; 0.7 takes 10+ references to reach the same stage. Either way there is a big barrier to entry. On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:11:22PM +0200, - wrote: Hi, I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think about what would motivate someone... I remember when I found freenet, I installed it spent hours reading over the technical jargon. It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that does not work. Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this complicated process and after waiting for three days with it on, it finally started working. The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, was because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. Here's the problem: If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable beta test, why would anyone new bother to join the community? Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to beta test some random highly technical peer to peer application that completely hogs your computer's resources? The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. A person who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just get rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, etc. If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your user base. The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that don't know about freenet already? So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser to just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also would volunteer. Best Regards, Van ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Thanks for the response, and I understand your points. The problem is that with 0.7 you're asking potential freenet users to find people in real life that they trust, which didn't happen with freenet 0.5. You're basically asking people to form rings called darknets. I'm sure this scares a lot of people away. Not to mention the additional effort involved in getting freenet going, which also is a barrier to new users. I personally would never have joined freenet this way, and never will join any ring. There's a flaw with the concept: Let's say I'm aChinese dissident. If I form a ring with other members in real-life, let's says they're my brothers and I trust them with my life. Even so, if one of us gets caught for whatever reason,most likelynothing to do with freenet, authorities will search his computer, and see that he's part of a ring. All other ring membersare immediately discovered and will go down with him. It canbe assumed by the authorities that other members of the ring were engaged in the same activity (i.e. Chinese dissidents). And that's just given that you have contacts that you trust in real life. But in reality people are not going to have real-life contacts with whom they want to share freenet. That means they're going to have to use the internet to find darknet peers. And that means that a any member of the governmnet can pose as a Chinese dissident and infiltrate freenet darknets.Being infiltrated only has to happen once, as soon as people find out, the entire freenet will collapse out of paranoia. So sorry if I haven't been reading the development forums, and others might have mentioned these points, butI don't believe there's a solution to this basic flaw in the concept, at least until openNet comes out (if that solves it?) and that's why many of us are worried about seeing 0.5 dying out. ---Original Message--- From: Matthew Toseland Date: 08/19/06 17:36:59 To: - Cc: support@freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 The installer for 0.7 is way better than the (unmaintained) installer for 0.5. And we simply don't have the resources to maintain both branches in any meaningful way. 0.7 is an unstable alpha test, but 0.5 isn't much better. In many ways 0.7's security is better *now*, and it will improve further. Admittedly in other ways it may be less secure, but I don't believe that 0.5 is significantly more secure than 0.7, even with the fake-darknet topology that we use for testing now (with a few real darknet links and lots of fake ones from #freenet-refs). Many of the more powerful attacks against 0.7, such as correlation attacks, were also viable against 0.5. And there is content. As far as initial speedgoes, 0.5 takes a week to get up to something vaguely resembling speed; 0.7 takes 10+ references to reach the same stage. Either way there is a big barrier to entry. On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:11:22PM +0200, - wrote: Hi, I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think about what would motivate someone... I remember when I found freenet, I installed it spent hours reading over the technical jargon. It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that does not work. Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this complicated process and after waiting for three days with it on, it finally started working. The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, was because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. Here's the problem: If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable beta test, why would anyone new bother to join the community? Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to beta test some random highly technical peer to peer application that completely hogs your computer's resources? The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. A person who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just get rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, etc. If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your user base. The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that don't know about freenet already? So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser to just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be willing to
RE: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Actually, since it is open software and the former 0.5 is extant can't you just do that? - Original Message - From: - To: support@freenetproject.org Sent: 8/19/2006 3:11:05 PM Subject: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 Hi, I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think about what would motivate someone... I remember when Ifound freenet,I installed itspent hours reading over the technical jargon. It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that does not work. Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this complicated process and after waitingfor three dayswith it on, it finally started working. The reason I spentmany hours and went back after throwing it outonce, was becauseI was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. Here's the problem: If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable beta test, why would anyone new bother to join the community? Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to beta test somerandom highly technical peer to peer application that completely hogs your computer's resources? The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. Aperson who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just get rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, etc. If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your user base. The onlyNEWusers you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that don't know about freenet already? So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser to just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be willing to helpcreate this website, and I'm sure many other people also would volunteer. Best Regards, Van ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
If you see it like that then you'd better go do something else with your time, because there is no solution. All opennet does is automate the process of finding not very trustworthy people to connect to - people who may well be The Bad Guys. Opennet makes it trivial to harvest and block the network, and darknet is *the only possible option* in any hostile regime, because opennet will most likely be blocked. If they want to attack it rather than blocking it, it is much easier to attack opennet than darknet. The point with darknet is to make it difficult for Them to block the network, and to make it difficult for Them to attack the network. It succeeds on both points: It is possible to attack, or block, a darknet, but it is expensive. Really, if you don't trust anyone, you shouldn't be using the internet, and you probably should reconsider whether life is worth living. :) On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 09:08:57PM +0200, - wrote: Thanks for the response, and I understand your points. The problem is that with 0.7 you're asking potential freenet users to find people in real life that they trust, which didn't happen with freenet 0.5. You're basically asking people to form rings called darknets. I'm sure this scares a lot of people away. Not to mention the additional effort involved in getting freenet going which also is a barrier to new users. I personally would never have joined freenet this way, and never will join any ring. There's a flaw with the concept: Let's say I'm a Chinese dissident. If I form a ring with other members in real-life, let's says they're my brothers and I trust them with my life. Even so, if one of us gets caught for whatever reason, most likely nothing to do with freenet, authorities will search his computer, and see that he's part of a ring. All other ring members are immediately discovered and will go down with him. It can be assumed by the authorities that other members of the ring were engaged in the same activity (i.e. Chinese dissidents). And that's just given that you have contacts that you trust in real life. But in reality people are not going to have real-life contacts with whom they want to share freenet. That means they're going to have to use the internet to find darknet peers. And that means that a any member of the governmnet can pose as a Chinese dissident and infiltrate freenet darknets. Being infiltrated only has to happen once, as soon as people find out, the entire freenet will collapse out of paranoia. So sorry if I haven't been reading the development forums, and others might have mentioned these points, but I don't believe there's a solution to this basic flaw in the concept, at least until openNet comes out (if that solves it?) and that's why many of us are worried about seeing 0.5 dying out. ---Original Message--- From: Matthew Toseland Date: 08/19/06 17:36:59 To: - Cc: support@freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 The installer for 0.7 is way better than the (unmaintained) installer for 0.5. And we simply don't have the resources to maintain both branches in any meaningful way. 0.7 is an unstable alpha test, but 0.5 isn't much better. In many ways 0.7's security is better *now*, and it will improve further. Admittedly in other ways it may be less secure, but I don't believe that 0.5 is significantly more secure than 0.7, even with the fake-darknet topology that we use for testing now (with a few real darknet links and lots of fake ones from #freenet-refs). Many of the more powerful attacks against 0.7, such as correlation attacks, were also viable against 0.5. And there is content. As far as initial speed goes, 0.5 takes a week to get up to something vaguely resembling speed; 0.7 takes 10+ references to reach the same stage. Either way there is a big barrier to entry. On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:11:22PM +0200, - wrote: Hi, I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think about what would motivate someone... I remember when I found freenet, I installed it spent hours reading over the technical jargon. It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that does not work. Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this complicated process and after waiting for three days with it on, it finally started working. The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, was because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. Here's the problem: If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable beta test, why would anyone new bother to join the community? Do you think people are nice
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Ok. I think when we're trying to create an anonymous internet network personal trust should not be involved, that defeats the point. Don't get me wrong, I think freenet is awsome, I'm really impressed bythe programming skill! Think about it though, once the first darknet gets infiltrated, it will become highly publicized, everyone will leave freenet. It's going to be hard convincing users to come back after that. Also, in most places freenet is not banned. As long as it's legal, the best way to hide is behind a large number of users, Any of The Bad Guys are welcome to join, since they can never prove who downloaded what (unlike darknet), only that you're using freenet, which isn't illegal. And harvesting the entire system, If I'm guessing correctly that would require the cooperation of numerous ISPs in lots of countries, so is it likely to happen? So, probably the best answer would be to have an opennet and a darknet that work together (the latter being optional for those that want it, and places where freenet becomes illegal!) ---Original Message--- From: Matthew Toseland Date: 08/19/06 21:40:31 To: - Cc: support@freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 If you see it like that then you'd better go do something else with your time, because there is no solution. All opennet does is automate the process of finding not very trustworthy people to connect to - people who may well be The Bad Guys. Opennet makes it trivial to harvest and block the network, and darknet is *the only possible option* in any hostile regime, because opennet will most likely be blocked. If they want to attack it rather than blocking it, it is much easier to attack opennet than darknet. The point with darknet is to make it difficult for Them to block the network, and to make it difficult for Them to attack the network. It succeeds on both points: It is possible to attack, or block, a darknet, but it is expensive. Really, if you don't trust anyone, you shouldn't be using the internet, and you probably should reconsider whether life is worth living. :) On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 09:08:57PM +0200, - wrote: Thanks for the response, and I understand your points. The problem is that with 0.7 you're asking potential freenet users to find people in real life that they trust, which didn't happen with freenet 0.5. You're basically asking people to form rings called darknets. I'm sure this scares a lot of people away. Not to mention the additional effort involved in getting freenet going which also is a barrier to new users. I personally would never have joined freenet this way, and never will join any ring. There's a flaw with the concept: Let's say I'm a Chinese dissident. If I form a ring with other members in real-life, let's says they're my brothers and I trust them with my life. Even so, if one of us gets caught for whatever reason, most likely nothing to do with freenet, authorities will search his computer, and see that he's part of a ring. All other ring members are immediately discovered and will go down with him. It can be assumed by the authorities that other members of the ring were engaged in the same activity (i.e. Chinese dissidents). And that's just given that you have contacts that you trust in real life. But in reality people are not going to have real-life contacts with whom they want to share freenet. That means they're going to have to use the internet to find darknet peers. And that means that a any member of the governmnet can pose as a Chinese dissident and infiltrate freenet darknets. Being infiltrated only has to happen once, as soon as people find out, the entire freenet will collapse out of paranoia. So sorry if I haven't been reading the development forums, and others might have mentioned these points, but I don't believe there's a solution to this basic flaw in the concept, at least until openNet comes out (if that solves it?) and that's why many of us are worried about seeing 0.5 dying out. ---Original Message--- From: Matthew Toseland Date: 08/19/06 17:36:59 To: - Cc: support@freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 The installer for 0.7 is way better than the (unmaintained) installer for 0.5. And we simply don't have the resources to maintain both branches in any meaningful way. 0.7 is an unstable alpha test, but 0.5 isn't much better. In many ways 0.7's security is better *now*, and it will improve further. Admittedly in other ways it may be less secure, but I don't believe that 0.5 is significantly more secure than 0.7, even with the fake-darknet topology that we use for testing now (with a few real darknet links and lots of fake ones from #freenet-refs). Many of the more powerful attacks against 0.7, such as correlation attacks, were also viable against 0.5. And there is content. As far as initial speedgoes, 0.5 takes a week to get up to something
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Hi, I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think about what would motivate someone... I remember when I found freenet, I installed it spent hours reading over the technical jargon. It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that does not work. Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this complicated process and after waiting for three days with it on, it finally started working. The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, was because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. Here's the problem: If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable beta test, why would anyone new bother to join the community? Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to beta test some random highly technical peer to peer application that completely hogs your computer's resources? The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. A person who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just get rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, etc. If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your user base. The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that don't know about freenet already? So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser to just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also would volunteer. Best Regards, Van -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/3332e5f0/attachment.html> -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BackGrnd.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1431 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/3332e5f0/attachment.jpg>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
The installer for 0.7 is way better than the (unmaintained) installer for 0.5. And we simply don't have the resources to maintain both branches in any meaningful way. 0.7 is an unstable alpha test, but 0.5 isn't much better. In many ways 0.7's security is better *now*, and it will improve further. Admittedly in other ways it may be less secure, but I don't believe that 0.5 is significantly more secure than 0.7, even with the fake-darknet topology that we use for testing now (with a few real darknet links and lots of fake ones from #freenet-refs). Many of the more powerful attacks against 0.7, such as correlation attacks, were also viable against 0.5. And there is content. As far as initial speed goes, 0.5 takes a week to get up to something vaguely resembling speed; 0.7 takes 10+ references to reach the same stage. Either way there is a big barrier to entry. On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:11:22PM +0200, - wrote: > Hi, > > I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test > freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. > > You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try > freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think > about what would motivate someone... > > I remember when I found freenet, I installed it spent hours reading over the > technical jargon. > It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that > does not work. > > Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this > complicated process and after waiting for three days with it on, it finally > started working. > > The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, was > because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. > > Here's the problem: > > If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable > beta test, > why would anyone new bother to join the community? > > Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to > beta test some random highly technical peer to peer application that > completely hogs your computer's resources? > > > > The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. > A person who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going > to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just get > rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, etc. > > If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install > program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your > user base. > > The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be > peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that > don't know about freenet already? > > So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser to > just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create > a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be > willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also > would volunteer. > > Best Regards, > > Van > > > > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/1cd085ea/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
sers away, It would be wiser to > just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create > a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be > willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also > would volunteer. > > Best Regards, > > Van > > > > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/d40f203b/attachment.html> -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BackGrnd.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1431 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/d40f203b/attachment.jpg>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Actually, since it is open software and the former 0.5 is extant can't you just do that? - Original Message - From: - To: support at freenetproject.org Sent: 8/19/2006 3:11:05 PM Subject: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 Hi, I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think about what would motivate someone... I remember when I found freenet, I installed it spent hours reading over the technical jargon. It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that does not work. Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this complicated process and after waiting for three days with it on, it finally started working. The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, was because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. Here's the problem: If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable beta test, why would anyone new bother to join the community? Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to beta test some random highly technical peer to peer application that completely hogs your computer's resources? The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. A person who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just get rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, etc. If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your user base. The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that don't know about freenet already? So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser to just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and create a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also would volunteer. Best Regards, Van -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/9e36491f/attachment.html> -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BackGrnd.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1431 bytes Desc: BackGrnd.jpg URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/9e36491f/attachment.jpg>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
process and after waiting for three days with it on, it > finally > > started working. > > > > The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, > was > > because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. > > > > Here's the problem: > > > > If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable > > beta test, > > why would anyone new bother to join the community? > > > > Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to > > beta test some random highly technical peer to peer application that > > completely hogs your computer's resources? > > > > > > > > The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. > > A person who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going > > to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just > get > > rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, > etc. > > > > If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install > > program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your > > user base. > > > > The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be > > peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that > > don't know about freenet already? > > > > So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser > to > > just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and > create > > a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be > > willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also > > would volunteer. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Van > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > Support mailing list > > Support at freenetproject.org > > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject > org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > -- > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/092df084/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
nd lots of > fake ones from #freenet-refs). Many of the more powerful attacks against > 0.7, such as correlation attacks, were also viable against 0.5. And > there is content. > > As far as initial speed goes, 0.5 takes a week to get up to something > vaguely resembling speed; 0.7 takes 10+ references to reach the same > stage. Either way there is a big barrier to entry. > > On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 05:11:22PM +0200, - wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I think you're making a mistake in forcing new people into the beta test > > freenet 0.7 instead of the established 0.5. > > > > You're forgetting how _highly_ someone new has to be motivated to try > > freenet, even version 0.5 which works and is not a beta test. Let's think > > about what would motivate someone... > > > > I remember when I found freenet, I installed it spent hours reading over > the > > technical jargon. > > It was incredible slow. I removed it thinking this is a pile of crap that > > does not work. > > > > Only a few months later, did I again bother to go through this > > complicated process and after waiting for three days with it on, it > finally > > started working. > > > > The reason I spent many hours and went back after throwing it out once, > was > > because I was _highly motivated_ for the anonymity and content. > > > > Here's the problem: > > > > If 0.7 doesn't offer the anonymity and the content, plus it's an unstable > > beta test, > > why would anyone new bother to join the community? > > > > Do you think people are nice enough to offer their time and computers to > > beta test some random highly technical peer to peer application that > > completely hogs your computer's resources? > > > > > > > > The problem with freenet (even 0.5) is, it just isn't user friendly. > > A person who just stumbles on freenet does not know if it's actually going > > to work. After seeing how slow it is, most people, like myself will just > get > > rid of it, not bothering to learn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, > etc. > > > > If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and install > > program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple your > > user base. > > > > The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be > > peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there that > > don't know about freenet already? > > > > So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be wiser > to > > just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and > create > > a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would be > > willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also > > would volunteer. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Van > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > Support mailing list > > Support at freenetproject.org > > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject > org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > -- > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/8d09f7f7/attachment.html> -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BackGrnd.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1431 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/8d09f7f7/attachment.jpg>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
rn all the configurations, frost, fuqid, > > etc. > > > > > > If you took the time to create a simple, down-to-earth website and > install > > > program without all the technical jargon, you would double or triple > your > > > user base. > > > > > > The only NEW users you're going to get to freenet 0.7 are going to be > > > peer-to-peer programming enthusiasts. And how many of those are there > that > > > don't know about freenet already? > > > > > > So instead of scaring all potential freenet users away, It would be > wiser > > to > > > just ask members of the freenet community to do the beta testing, and > > create > > > a nice user friendly website for 0,5 until 0,7 is working. Even I would > be > > > willing to help create this website, and I'm sure many other people also > > > would volunteer. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > > > Van > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > Support mailing list > > > Support at freenetproject.org > > > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > > > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject > > org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > > > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > > > -- > > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > > > > > > > ___ > > Support mailing list > > Support at freenetproject.org > > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject > org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > -- > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060819/46da7f68/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] 0.7 Install help for w87se
This is a Type III anonymous message, sent to you by the Mixminion server at mercurio.mixmaster.it. If you do not want to receive anonymous messages, please contact mercurio-admin at mixmaster.it -BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext Will someone please provide install helps / directions for 0.7 in w98se? I have searched archives and google and tried several procedures I found but they have all failed in various ways. I figure now the best way is to do a "by hand" install similar to that which is possible with 0.5 I am using w98se with all updates and Sun java C:\WINDOWS>java -version java version "1.4.2_12" Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.4.2_12-b03) Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.4.2_12-b03, mixed mode) Thanks (pardon if this is a duplicate) -END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
