1. This is nonsense. A darknet doesn't have to be small. A WASTE darknet has to be small; a Freenet 0.7 darknet can be large, because your friends connect to their friends who connect to their friends; you can get a lot of nodes in relatively few hops. There are no "other darknet programs out there" in the sense of Freenet 0.7's darknet: It is radically different to WASTE. It is a *globally scalable* darknet, not a single cell darknet where everyone knows everyone else directly.
2. It is already actively being planned. The EFF, the ACLU and the FFII are swamped. Freenet is probably illegal today under passed legislation, and in any case MY passion for Freenet has always been based on using it in hostile regimes (China blocks freenet 0.5 based on session bytes). One side effect of the (impossibly broad) IPRED2 directive going through in the EU might be making Freenet illegal (along making patent infringement a criminal offence, the world's first 'incitement to IP violation' law and lots of other terrible things). Hopefully this will be defeated, but they'll be back with something more specifically against filesharing (like the French DADVSI law) in a few years. On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:33:58PM -0400, 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. > > On 8/24/06, Lars Juel Nielsen <lars.j.nielsen at gmail.com> wrote: > >On 8/24/06, urza9814 at gmail.com <urza9814 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> "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 > >> connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each > >other. > >> Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one > >> shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this > >assumption?" > >> > >> Yup...pretty much. That's why so many people refuse to switch to 0.7 > >> until there's a working opennet. I'm one of them. With an opennet, you > >> connect to anyone who's online, with multiple connections. Don't have > >> to trade references and you get a lot more connections with no effort. > > > >What will you do when freenet is made illegal and all the nodes are > >being harvested and blocked by a national firewall? Then the whole > >network fall apart, this can not happen with a darknet if it's done > >right. To take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick > >them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts > >are part of it. > > > >It's a lot easier, cheaper and faster to take down an opennet than a > >darknet. > > > >> Not totally sure about the 'if the one node linking them dies you lose > >> all that data' part...seems like that's how it'd be handled, but I > >> haven't looked into 0.7 too much...because it has no opennet, so I > >> have no use for it. > >> > >> On 8/24/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com <diddler4u at hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > What about a pipe to the 0.5 freenet from 0.7 that allows access to the > >> > data? A 1-way street. 0.7 can add data to the 0.7 freenet, but can > >and to > >> > the 0.5 freenet. Only access the data. From what I have gathered, > >> > 'inserting' data into freenet is not a quick task. > >> > > >> > 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 > >> > connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each > >other. > >> > Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one > >> > shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this > >assumption? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >From: urza9814 at gmail.com > >> > >Reply-To: support at freenetproject.org > >> > >To: support at freenetproject.org > >> > >Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 > >> > >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:01:46 -0400 > >> > > > >> > >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 much, there's nowhere for the content to go. > >> > >It'd be like trying to move everything on the internet to your local > >> > >LAN. > >> > >That, and it's just a complete program re-write I believe. It's quite > >> > >easy to 'convert' the content...open a page, save it, and then > >> > >re-upload it. The data stores work differently, and anyways the data > >> > >is distributed, so there wouldn't be any easy way to move it over. > >> > > > >> > >On 8/24/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com <diddler4u at hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>I've got a question for the developers. > >> > >> > >> > >>First a couple of comments. > >> > >> > >> > >>I've been watching the thread 0.5 vs 0.7, and although you want to > >move it > >> > >>somewhere else I welcome it. > >> > >> > >> > >>I brought up 0.7 about 5 days ago. It's been running ever since, I > >think. > >> > >>I > >> > >>don't monitor the PC that it is on, but I do see activity on the > >router > >> > >>port > >> > >>for the PC. I didn't much like the idea of asking people to let me > >access > >> > >>Freenet through them, but I did. I still think that is a good idea > >to gain > >> > >>initial access to Freenet, but after that it should go find other > >nodes > >> > >>and > >> > >>establish connections to them. I shouldn't have to always rely on > >the ones > >> > >>that were on IRC chat at the time I decided to set up the > >application. > >> > >> > >> > >>That said, here is by question. > >> > >> > >> > >> >From what I've seen here, there is a huge base of Freenet users on > >0.5, > >> > >>and > >> > >>a large amount of content. What I fail to understand is why going to > >> > >>version > >> > >>0.7 all of that userbase and content was dropped. Why there was no > >way to > >> > >>connect to that Freenet and have access to the users and the > >content. I've > >> > >>tried to think of an example of some other internet application that > >made > >> > >>such a radical change that the entire existing base was dropped, and > >quite > >> > >>frankly I can't come up with one. I've seen application for my PC > >change > >> > >>so > >> > >>radically the data from the old application had to be converted > >before it > >> > >>would work, but a migration path was always provided. Developers, > >why did > >> > >>you do that? > >> > >> > >> > >>I'm new to the Freenet community, and I find it incredulous that > >years of > >> > >>effort involved with building the Freenet community was abandoned > >> > >>completely. What you have created is a 0.5 and a 0.7 Freenet; both > >will > >> > >>exist into the future. Just as many security conscious people quit > >> > >>upgrading > >> > >>PGP after 6.52 because source code was no longer readily available, > >many > >> > >>people will quit upgrading Freenet after 0.5. The difference is with > >PGP a > >> > >>file encrypted with 6.52 can be read by the newer versions. Freenet > >has > >> > >>isolated all of it's previous userbase and content. > >> > >> > >> > >>There is a saying, "Throwing out the baby with the bath water." You > >have > >> > >>done just that. > >> > >> > >> > >>_________________________________________________________________ > >> > >>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's > >FREE! > >> > >>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >> > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >> > >>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 > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >-- > >> > ><HTML> > >> > ><a href="http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=57";><img > >> > >border="0" alt="Get Firefox!" title="Get Firefox!" > >> > > >>src="http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/></a> > >> > >_______________________________________________ > >> > >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 > >> > > >> > _________________________________________________________________ > >> > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's > >FREE! > >> > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > 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 > >> > > >> > >> > >> -- > >> <HTML> > >> <a > >href="http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=57";><img > >> border="0" alt="Get Firefox!" title="Get Firefox!" > >> > >src="http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/></a> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > >_______________________________________________ > >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 > > > > > -- > <HTML> > <a href="http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=57";><img > border="0" alt="Get Firefox!" title="Get Firefox!" > src="http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/></a> > _______________________________________________ > 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/20060825/0c034580/attachment.pgp>
![http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/](http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/){kind=link}