[freenet-support] Unauthorized upload?

2008-09-22 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Yes, that is normal. People are downloading files from you. That's how Freenet works. On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Art Charbonneau wrote: > On my freenet homepage I noticed in the stats that 5 uploads were active > even though I had not initiated any uploads. Is this normal, or is

[freenet-support] Darknet Question .... and some other fundamental Qs

2008-08-03 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Well, the entire point of Freenet is that nobody can know where the data originated. So if you're asking if there's a way to only get data inserted by nodes you're friends with - no. That would defeat the purpose of Freenet. If you're asking if you can only get data that is stored on your friends'

[freenet-support] does freenet slow down the computer

2007-11-02 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
There should be bandwidth limits somewhere in the config file. I'm using 0.5myself, I'm guessing you're on 0.7, but look around in freenet.conf or whatever configuration files you can find for some kind of input and output bandwidth limits. I suggest running a speed test on your connection (just

[freenet-support] unable to access http://127.0.0.1:8888/ as instructed in welcome page (OS X 10.2.8)

2007-06-14 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Ensure that freenet is actually running. Personally I run Linux and Freenet 0.5, but I'm thinking it'll probably be about the same. Just look for and run 'start-freenet.sh'. It might take a while for that to start up, so give it a few minutes before trying to get to 127.0.0.1:. On 6/4/07, Ben

[freenet-support] Newbie Reply

2007-05-01 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
well, unless something's changed in the newer versions (I still use 0.5 for various reasons), that means freenet isn't running. I'm assuming you are running windows, so make sure the little freenet icon appears in the system tray, and if so, right click and there should be an option to view the

[freenet-support] Newbie

2007-04-30 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
You would search for files by either finding them on websites (check http://localhost: if you haven't already) or using the search feature of frost. On 4/30/07, Brent Pugh wrote: > Hi I was wondering how to set this up and actually what it was. I was > thinking of using fuqid .how do i

[freenet-support] unrecognized command: Java -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize

2007-04-29 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Just wanna post this so there's an answer in the archives: Turns out I didn't have real java. I had 'JamVM'. Which, despite running the real java install several times, is still running instead of java. And it won't let me uninstall it. But I have freenet working now by putting in the full path

[freenet-support] unrecognized command: Java -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize

2007-04-26 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
That's not working. One other thing I had to change in the script was add an 'LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.6.17'...I just threw that in after all the if loops that set that...but whenever I try running it now it just gives me this: [root at localhost freenet]# sh start-freenet.sh Detected freenet-ext.jar

[freenet-support] unrecognized command: Java -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize

2007-04-26 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
I'm trying to get Freenet 0.5 working, but I'm encountering the following error: [root at localhost freenet]# sh start-freenet.sh Detected freenet-ext.jar Detected freenet.jar Sun java detected. Sun Java 1.4.2 detected. Starting Freenet now: Command line: java -Xmx128m

[freenet-support] libc.so.6

2007-01-04 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Hmm. I commented them out, and now it APPEARS to run fine, but it doesn't. On 1/4/07, bo-le at web.de wrote: > try to remove/comment out the LD_ASSUME_KERNEL thingy in the start scripts. > I use a 2.6.18.2-kernel, both freenet versions (5 and 7) runs proper without > this und both give me lib

[freenet-support] libc.so.6

2007-01-03 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
So I had this exact same problem before, and I fixed it by using a different linux distro (switch from slackware back to Mandriva 2006). But now I'm on the distro that worked a year later (Mandriva 2007) and it's no longer working. But I'm a bit smarter now, so I'm hoping I can get it figured out.

[freenet-support] HELP...Uninstallation

2006-12-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Well, on Linux I know all you have to do is delete the files, it doesn't run automatically though. On windoze, there's an uninstall file. So look for an uninstall file, and if you don't have one, just delete it. On 12/6/06, Gabriel Lipson wrote: > I desperately need to remove freenet from

[freenet-support] HELP!!!!!

2006-12-19 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
All the download links on that page are 0.5. If you're on windows hit the 'freenet-java-webinstall.exe' link, if on linux/unix use the 'freenet-stable-latest.tgz' On 12/19/06, damian alexander wrote: > hmm , went to that link didnt see a download for 0.5,??? > > > >From: urza9814 at

[freenet-support] HELP!!!!!

2006-12-19 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
You are far from the first person to have a problem with getting node refs for Freenet 0.7. I'm gonna say what I tell everyone else: Don't use 0.7. It's pretty much experimental. There's a good reason a large number of us are holding on to 0.5, a big one for me being that it's a true opennet

[freenet-support] Freenet (0.5, Build 5106) has trouble with time transitions

2006-10-29 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Mine didn't. I'm running 0.5 on Linux. When I ran 0.5 on WinXP, it hit 100% CPU usage half an hour after I started it anyways Mebbe it's a problem in 0.7? On 10/29/06, Mr. Flibble wrote: > > It happened before, and it happened again tonight. I got woken up by > > alarms indicating 100 % CPU

[freenet-support] Re: Welcome to the "Support" mailing list

2006-10-28 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
You need to connect to irc.freenode.net with an IRC client, not your web browser. Try mirc, which is available here: http://www.mirc.com/get.html You could also (and I highly recommend this approach) try downloading Freenet 0.5 instead, which does not require you to manually gather node

[freenet-support] UNINSTALLER

2006-09-07 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
You do realize that on Limewire ANYONE can see what you search, what you download, and who you are, right? Limewire makes you create a username and gives out your IP address. I have found people's exact street address with just a username and IP. It's not that hard. Freenet, on the other hand,

[freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7

2006-08-30 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Have you thought about that ignoring reset packets thing that was shown to make it possible to bypass The Great Firewall? I mean, I don't know too much about it, or if it'd be possible for freenetbut it might be worth looking in to. Also just wanna add that I fully support the desire to help

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-27 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Exactly. The theory of a darknet is you connect to people that you already know and trust. Now, there's a good chance of getting a worldwide-net because someone in group A may know and trust someone in group B, but chances are that not all of group A knows all of group B. For a real-world

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-27 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
I got nothing. No 'icon', no tags to place an icon, nothing. On 8/27/06, Nicholas Sturm wrote: > When I opened the message below all that displayed was an icon. When I > attempted to save the icon all hell broke loose. My mail client was > closed. After some attempts I was able to reboot and

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-27 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Yea, but you don't know all the nodes in the network, you just know the ones your connected to. So if one of those links between the networks goes down, half your downloads stall out and die. And wouldn't that put a pretty big strain on certain computers? I mean, if you get this global network of

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-26 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Through the opennet. Which won't exist for, like, a year. Hmmm. On 8/26/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > >>Freenet 0.5 is an opennet. You connect to any random node that happens > >>to be on. Freenet 0.7 doesn't have this yet. In 0.7, there is no main > >>network. There might be now,

Migration path, please! (Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0, 5 and 0, 7

2006-08-24 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
opennets are only bad in certain circumstances. The USA is not yet one of them. With a darknet, it may be harder to get into the network, but once your in it's a LOT easier to identify who is sharing and inserting what files. So it could be argued that a darknet is much riskier than an opennet. In

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-24 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
"As I see it 0.7 relies on a bunch of people hooking up by sharing node information. I may be a part of a freenet 0.7 network that consists of less than 20 people. Out there somewhere else is another group of people, but that group might be 100 people. Unless someone in the 2 groups makes a

Migration path, please! (Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0, 5 and 0, 7

2006-08-24 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
0.7 is currently darknet only. 0.5 is opennet only. On 8/24/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > So by running 0.7 in default mode I'm running in darknet? Or is there > another piece of the freenet puzzle I need to discover? > > > >From: "Evan Daniel" > >Reply-To: evand at pobox.com, support

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-24 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Freenet 0.5 is an opennet. You connect to any random node that happens to be on. Freenet 0.7 doesn't have this yet. In 0.7, there is no main network. There might be now, but the idea of the way it currently is setup is to allow small groups to connect without connecting to everyone else. Pretty

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
It has no opennet. As far as I'm concerned, it's useless. On 8/23/06, Ortwin Regel wrote: > Wrong, it works quite well so it's functional. It's not completed but it > needs users to progress. > > > On 8/24/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: > > > 0.7 isn't a stable version either. It's a not

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
0.7 isn't a stable version either. It's a not nearly completed, far from functional version. On 8/23/06, Ortwin Regel wrote: > 0.5 isn't a stable version. It's an outdated version that many people > happen to use. Of course you can keep using 0.5 and slowly watch it > die, or even try to keep it

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
My bad. 400 known nodes. Though...I have 50 connections right now and I'm not doing anything. Not running frost, not surving any sites...all inbound I guess. On 8/23/06, Matthew Toseland wrote: > 400 connections? I hardly ever saw more than 100. > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 09:09:59AM -0400,

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.5 or Freenet 0.7

2006-08-23 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
With 0.5's opennet you don't have to exchange node references. At all. Your node does it for you. And you'll usually have around 400 connections with the default settings. And 0.5 has more content and probably more users, though I'm not sure on that one. On 8/23/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-21 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
"Anyway, I won't argue on that because the decision is not in my hands. The fact is that 0.7 is the only supported version and that it is the future. Not linking to the current version and gripping to the old one would be an interesting kind of suicide for a project that's a constant

[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7

2006-08-21 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
.7 has very few users, very little content, and no opennet. It's useless for new users. And the security that you say is better has yet to be tested. I wouldn't bet on something that's only been around for a few months vs. something that's been slowly improving for...well, longer than I've known

[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 947

2006-08-16 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
You really ought to get a second mailing list for the 0.7 network. Because I'm pretty sure no one here cares until there's an opennet. On 8/16/06, Matthew Toseland wrote: > Freenet build 947 is now available. This build simply makes 944 > mandatory as of midnight GMT on Monday (the 21st). This

[freenet-support] Linux Spiders

2006-07-14 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Well, after failing to install Freenet on Slackware, I realized, Mandrake was the best (in terms of 'just working') Linux distro I'd ever used up until 10.1 and 2005LE, so I decided to give it another shot. So far so good. Freenet's running nicely too, once I found the missing step in the Java

[freenet-support] Multiple nodes on one IP

2006-07-08 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Ok, I think my ISP changed my IP address recently or something, because my freenet speed suddenly went to hell...and it's not much of a problem, because my IP only changes once every few months, so I don't really need to get a redirect or anything. I'm just wondering though, if I set up another

[freenet-support] libc.so.6

2006-06-20 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
I'm trying to install freenet on slackware, and I must say it's been quite annoying so far...I had everything in a freenet folder in my home directory, but had to copy half the files right into my home directory anyways because it couldn't find them otherwise...but anyways, here's my current

[freenet-support] Freenet on proxy?

2006-03-30 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
Is there any way to get Freenet to run through a proxy? Specifically, I need it to run through privoxy on my other comp...because this comp connects through a wired connection to another comp which connects to my router wirelessly, and I can't use bridge connection (need the connection sharing)

[freenet-support] Connection timeouts

2006-03-02 Thread urza9...@gmail.com
I keep getting connection timeouts, and I think it might be due to the nature of my internet connection, but I'm not sure how to go about fixing that. Basically, what I have is a router connected to two computers, and then this computer is connected through one of those two by a cable connection.