I got nothing. No 'icon', no tags to place an icon, nothing.
On 8/27/06, Nicholas Sturm [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
On 8/27/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Through the opennet. Which won't exist for, like, a year.
Hmmm.
Except they won't be using the opennet at all if they're serious
enough about keeping their net and themselves safe that they won't use
IRC to find new connections.
The
Hi,
Great discussion I have a few questions too, but should we move it to another list?
I feel bad about having started it here,
Van
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Please justify your assumptions.
There is a lot of data on social networks that says that is not how
they look. I see no reason to believe the social networks a freenet
darknet would be built upon would be different.
Evan
On 8/26/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yea, but you
On 8/27/06, - [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Great discussion I have a few questions too, but should we move it to another
list?
I feel bad about having started it here,
Van
The chat mailinglist would be better. Thanks :)
--
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall
Evan,
You are right - there is a lot of data to show that social networks do
expand in the method being said here, but that data is based on known,
non-anonymous social networks. In an anonymous network the rule of thumb is
trust no one.
If an openet is not the solution, neither is posting
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
Hi, I'm attempting to move this discussion the the chat list as requested,
I've posted there and looking forward to your replies!
If you're not subscribed you can look at it here:
http://archives.freenetproject.org/list/chat.en.html
___
I guess you could move it to a place where many of us don't know how to get too. So much has changed from the early freenet that I have found very little of what I once knew about.
- Original Message -
From: -
To: support@freenetproject.org
Sent: 8/27/2006 12:15:36 PM
Subject:
Even freenet has a habit of talking about places without providing a
pointer. Is that a built-in property of most freetnet folks. I.e., if I
know what I'm talking about then everyone knows about it?
[Original Message]
From: Juiceman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: support@freenetproject.org
Date:
Really, if you don't trust anyone, you shouldn't be using the internet,
and you probably should reconsider whether life is worth living. :)
I trust a lot of people a little bit. I don't trust many people a lot.
And I've never really become acquainted philosophically with anyone on
freenet.
On 8/27/06, Nicholas Sturm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even freenet has a habit of talking about places without providing a
pointer. Is that a built-in property of most freetnet folks. I.e., if I
know what I'm talking about then everyone knows about it?
>>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.
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
I agree. I wouldn't want to be the only connection between 2 networks, or
even one of a small few. I simply don't have the bandwidth. Maybe a T1 or T3
could handle it, but not what 90+% of the people using freenet would have to
work with.
As I follow these threads I begin to see a core group
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 the spamblocker
(earthlink) had examined the message and found nothing suspicious. However
now I found
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
On 8/27/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote:
> Through the opennet. Which won't exist for, like, a year.
> Hmmm.
Except they won't be using the opennet at all if they're serious
enough about keeping their net and themselves safe that they won't use
IRC to find new connections.
The end result of
Hi,
Great discussion I have a few questions too, but should we move it to
another list?
I feel bad about having started it here,
Van
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060827/9fa49
Please justify your assumptions.
There is a lot of data on social networks that says that is not how
they look. I see no reason to believe the social networks a freenet
darknet would be built upon would be different.
Evan
On 8/26/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote:
> Yea, but you don't know all
On 8/27/06, - wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Great discussion I have a few questions too, but should we move it to another
> list?
> I feel bad about having started it here,
>
> Van
>
The chat mailinglist would be better. Thanks :)
--
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend,
Evan,
You are right - there is a lot of data to show that social networks do
expand in the method being said here, but that data is based on known,
non-anonymous social networks. In an anonymous network the rule of thumb is
trust no one.
If an openet is not the solution, neither is posting
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
was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060827/ed094dca/attachment.html>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: BackGrnd.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1431 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
tps://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060827/d5862a3a/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/at
Even freenet has a habit of talking about places without providing a
pointer. Is that a built-in property of most freetnet folks. I.e., if I
know what I'm talking about then everyone knows about it?
> [Original Message]
> From: Juiceman
> To:
> Date: 8/27/2006 12:22:42 PM
> Subject: Re:
>
> Really, if you don't trust anyone, you shouldn't be using the internet,
> and you probably should reconsider whether life is worth living. :)
>
I trust a lot of people a little bit. I don't trust many people a lot.
And I've never really become acquainted philosophically with anyone on
On 8/27/06, Nicholas Sturm wrote:
> Even freenet has a habit of talking about places without providing a
> pointer. Is that a built-in property of most freetnet folks. I.e., if I
> know what I'm talking about then everyone knows about it?
>
-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
Message-type: plaintext
In <35af28770608261648v10edeb06mee2478eebf1be3b0 at mail.gmail.com> urza9814 at
gmail.com wrote:
>Through the opennet. Which won't exist for, like, a year.
>Hmmm.
>
>On 8/26/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote:
>> >>Freenet
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006, Ian Clarke wrote:
>On 24 Aug 2006, at 12:01, urza9814 at gmail.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, but the idea of the way
30 matches
Mail list logo