On 8/24/06, urza9814 at gmail.com <urza9814 at gmail.com> wrote:
> True, but the opennet isn't illegal.
> I'm not in any way saying the darknet shouldn't be added...it's a
> great feature...but freenet has always been an opennet, and that
> should be done first. People who want a darknet are probably already
> using other programs like Waste. If they start thinking about making
> the opennet form of freenet illegal, we'll know long before it
> happens. And there will be plenty of people (EFF, ACLU, etc) fighting
> it. I realize there are other countries where they can't use an
> opennet, but like I said, there are other darknet programs out there.
> That's not what freenet is.

Apparantly you don't pay attention because it may already be illegal
in France due to a recently passed law (and possibly EU soon).  In the
United States it could be illegal in a heartbeat if Congress knew
about it and labeled it a "weapon of terrorists."

"It doesn't effect 'my country' atm so why should I care?" is what I
am hearing from you.  Please correct me if i'm wrong.

As far as ACLU and EFF, they can fight to get it back, but it can be
taken away for years in the meantime while the courts decide on it.
Also with the current lineup of the Supreme Court it is not a
slam-dunk that we would get it back...

For those of you have never even tried to use 0.7 but are complaining about it:
1.  You shouldn't argue until you at least try it.
2.  It performs quite well IMO compared to 0.5
3.  Almost every app from 0.5 works with 0.7 now (or there is an
equivalent program available)
4.  It is a complete re-write of almost all the code and uses a
dramatically different data format so backwards compatibility is not
possible.  Move forward.  :)
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the
death, your right to say it. - Voltaire

Reply via email to