Re: [freenet-support] Re: Support Digest, Vol 16, Issue 19
Fair enough. Is anyone actually working on it any more? Also, have they gotten rid of the home grown (and therefore insecure almost by definition, unless the home happens to be the NSA) crypto algorithms? On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 05:47:09AM -0800, Michael wrote: > I jumped the Freenet ship over a month ago and swam to the easy safety > of Entropy. Maybe not all the content but hey, it works and works and > doesn't need updates of anything(java or otherwise), it is consistent, > fast, and I don't have to maintain, re-maintain, shutdown, restart, > reconfigure, renothing to keep it going, plus, no bickering on the chats > over what is the problem du jour with the networks or nodes. > Danke. > I may return to check out Freenet some day. Marginally possible. > > On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 00:55, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Send Support mailing list submissions to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Support digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > >1. a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) > >2. and another thing (Newsbyte) > >3. RE: a dead horse and other animals (Nicholas Sturm) > >4. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Toad) > >5. Re: and another thing (Toad) > >6. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Wayne McDougall) > >7. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) > > > > > > -- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:22:04 +0100 > > From: "Newsbyte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [freenet-support] a dead horse and other animals > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > "I've been getting TFE fine, but I haven't been able to load FIND for almost > > a > > week. The lists are pretty silent lately, as well. Conspiracy theory, > > anyone?" > > > > No, the explanation is simply this, that many active (meaning formerly > > inserting/posting) Freenetters have gone over to i2p. Not only do you see > > icons such as thetower guy there, but a lot of other ex-freenetters, some of > > which still didn't leave Freenet completely (like me). > > > > I've been pointing that out in the irc chan too, but I got slapped on the > > wrist for it. aparently, saying the obvious is 'not done'. For the first > > time, Freenet has some serious competition, and it's not performing well, > > speaking in a darwinian sense. As yet, it doesn't seem to affect finances > > that much, but once you start to lose interest and people go to another > > (promising) I2P, that can't be far away. > > > > I have said many times before that there is a lack of progress, or at least > > a sense of progress, certainly for the ordinary freenet user (and, in fact, > > for the end-user there HAS been little progress). The development cycle of > > Freenet is NOT normal, not even for a new-technology-beta. It seems that > > Freenet is performing better...but compared to what? To how it was a year > > ago? No doubt, back then it was totally bork. It's a pitty we don't have > > performance testing logs, but I suspect that it's now about as good as it > > was 2 years ago...hmmm. Yesyes, I know a lot of technological goodies have > > been added, but that doesn't interest Joe Doe: he just wants it to work, and > > good. That means, primarely; finding something he wants, and d/l it fast, > > and, seen the fact it's freenet, in a safe manner. > > > > Freenet doesn't do all that. > > > > Now, granted, though I have been pleasantly surprised, neither does I2P, as > > yet. But the difference is, they are working 4 months on it, and have come a > > long way and they *are* improving dramatically. With that pace they are > > gaining support rapidly, as already can be seen (and that's why it has > > suddenly become more quiet on the posts, and Freesites are less and less > > being updated). The moment the DHT is ready, Freenet will not offer anything > > en plus, practically speaking. > > > > Now, I'm ambigous about this all. In theory, competition is a good > > thing...only it doesn't seem to have any impact, here. It's mostly being > > ignored, and when someone points it out, it's not welcomed. Furthermore, I > > don't think two main anonymity projects can be maintained by the OSS crowd, > > at least not the way it is done now. what is taken by one is at the loss of > > the other one, and vice versa, me thinks. > > > > That's why, in a former post, I tried to stimulate both parties to try to > > merge their technology and forces...but to no apparent avail. I
Re: [freenet-support] Re: Support Digest, Vol 16, Issue 19
I am glad that you are happy, but what relevance does this have to the Freenet support mailing list? Ian. On 26 Nov 2004, at 13:47, Michael wrote: I jumped the Freenet ship over a month ago and swam to the easy safety of Entropy. Maybe not all the content but hey, it works and works and doesn't need updates of anything(java or otherwise), it is consistent, fast, and I don't have to maintain, re-maintain, shutdown, restart, reconfigure, renothing to keep it going, plus, no bickering on the chats over what is the problem du jour with the networks or nodes. Danke. I may return to check out Freenet some day. Marginally possible. On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 00:55, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Send Support mailing list submissions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Support digest..." Today's Topics: 1. a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) 2. and another thing (Newsbyte) 3. RE: a dead horse and other animals (Nicholas Sturm) 4. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Toad) 5. Re: and another thing (Toad) 6. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Wayne McDougall) 7. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:22:04 +0100 From: "Newsbyte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [freenet-support] a dead horse and other animals To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" "I've been getting TFE fine, but I haven't been able to load FIND for almost a week. The lists are pretty silent lately, as well. Conspiracy theory, anyone?" No, the explanation is simply this, that many active (meaning formerly inserting/posting) Freenetters have gone over to i2p. Not only do you see icons such as thetower guy there, but a lot of other ex-freenetters, some of which still didn't leave Freenet completely (like me). I've been pointing that out in the irc chan too, but I got slapped on the wrist for it. aparently, saying the obvious is 'not done'. For the first time, Freenet has some serious competition, and it's not performing well, speaking in a darwinian sense. As yet, it doesn't seem to affect finances that much, but once you start to lose interest and people go to another (promising) I2P, that can't be far away. I have said many times before that there is a lack of progress, or at least a sense of progress, certainly for the ordinary freenet user (and, in fact, for the end-user there HAS been little progress). The development cycle of Freenet is NOT normal, not even for a new-technology-beta. It seems that Freenet is performing better...but compared to what? To how it was a year ago? No doubt, back then it was totally bork. It's a pitty we don't have performance testing logs, but I suspect that it's now about as good as it was 2 years ago...hmmm. Yesyes, I know a lot of technological goodies have been added, but that doesn't interest Joe Doe: he just wants it to work, and good. That means, primarely; finding something he wants, and d/l it fast, and, seen the fact it's freenet, in a safe manner. Freenet doesn't do all that. Now, granted, though I have been pleasantly surprised, neither does I2P, as yet. But the difference is, they are working 4 months on it, and have come a long way and they *are* improving dramatically. With that pace they are gaining support rapidly, as already can be seen (and that's why it has suddenly become more quiet on the posts, and Freesites are less and less being updated). The moment the DHT is ready, Freenet will not offer anything en plus, practically speaking. Now, I'm ambigous about this all. In theory, competition is a good thing...only it doesn't seem to have any impact, here. It's mostly being ignored, and when someone points it out, it's not welcomed. Furthermore, I don't think two main anonymity projects can be maintained by the OSS crowd, at least not the way it is done now. what is taken by one is at the loss of the other one, and vice versa, me thinks. That's why, in a former post, I tried to stimulate both parties to try to merge their technology and forces...but to no apparent avail. Is it that difficult to see that both projects have specific advantages, that would or at least could benefit both? Geez. Freenet has potential, it still has, but it just lays there as a dead horse, and i2p is has great ease-to-use promise, but still has to prove some basic things, like being able to scale (not that Freenet is out of the loop with that one neither). Anyways, when I pointed t
[freenet-support] Re: Support Digest, Vol 16, Issue 19
I jumped the Freenet ship over a month ago and swam to the easy safety of Entropy. Maybe not all the content but hey, it works and works and doesn't need updates of anything(java or otherwise), it is consistent, fast, and I don't have to maintain, re-maintain, shutdown, restart, reconfigure, renothing to keep it going, plus, no bickering on the chats over what is the problem du jour with the networks or nodes. Danke. I may return to check out Freenet some day. Marginally possible. On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 00:55, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Send Support mailing list submissions to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Support digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > >1. a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) >2. and another thing (Newsbyte) >3. RE: a dead horse and other animals (Nicholas Sturm) >4. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Toad) >5. Re: and another thing (Toad) >6. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Wayne McDougall) >7. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) > > > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:22:04 +0100 > From: "Newsbyte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [freenet-support] a dead horse and other animals > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > "I've been getting TFE fine, but I haven't been able to load FIND for almost > a > week. The lists are pretty silent lately, as well. Conspiracy theory, > anyone?" > > No, the explanation is simply this, that many active (meaning formerly > inserting/posting) Freenetters have gone over to i2p. Not only do you see > icons such as thetower guy there, but a lot of other ex-freenetters, some of > which still didn't leave Freenet completely (like me). > > I've been pointing that out in the irc chan too, but I got slapped on the > wrist for it. aparently, saying the obvious is 'not done'. For the first > time, Freenet has some serious competition, and it's not performing well, > speaking in a darwinian sense. As yet, it doesn't seem to affect finances > that much, but once you start to lose interest and people go to another > (promising) I2P, that can't be far away. > > I have said many times before that there is a lack of progress, or at least > a sense of progress, certainly for the ordinary freenet user (and, in fact, > for the end-user there HAS been little progress). The development cycle of > Freenet is NOT normal, not even for a new-technology-beta. It seems that > Freenet is performing better...but compared to what? To how it was a year > ago? No doubt, back then it was totally bork. It's a pitty we don't have > performance testing logs, but I suspect that it's now about as good as it > was 2 years ago...hmmm. Yesyes, I know a lot of technological goodies have > been added, but that doesn't interest Joe Doe: he just wants it to work, and > good. That means, primarely; finding something he wants, and d/l it fast, > and, seen the fact it's freenet, in a safe manner. > > Freenet doesn't do all that. > > Now, granted, though I have been pleasantly surprised, neither does I2P, as > yet. But the difference is, they are working 4 months on it, and have come a > long way and they *are* improving dramatically. With that pace they are > gaining support rapidly, as already can be seen (and that's why it has > suddenly become more quiet on the posts, and Freesites are less and less > being updated). The moment the DHT is ready, Freenet will not offer anything > en plus, practically speaking. > > Now, I'm ambigous about this all. In theory, competition is a good > thing...only it doesn't seem to have any impact, here. It's mostly being > ignored, and when someone points it out, it's not welcomed. Furthermore, I > don't think two main anonymity projects can be maintained by the OSS crowd, > at least not the way it is done now. what is taken by one is at the loss of > the other one, and vice versa, me thinks. > > That's why, in a former post, I tried to stimulate both parties to try to > merge their technology and forces...but to no apparent avail. Is it that > difficult to see that both projects have specific advantages, that would or > at least could benefit both? Geez. Freenet has potential, it still has, but > it just lays there as a dead horse, and i2p is has great ease-to-use > promise, but still has to prove some basic things, like being able to scale > (not that Freenet is out of the loop with that one neither). > > Anyways, when I pointed this out, I got the remark I was b
