I think a big issue right now is that it is in development. A lot of people just want to see how well it works, what kind of content there is, etc.. Once it is to a stable point then those with the need for darknets will begin to construct their own. But, right now.. people are just curious and want it to work "out-of-the-box".
I believe, as soon as it is feasible, the opennet should be deployed. That will curb the apetite of those who just want to try it out, see what it is, see what's there, etc.. That will be the way to garner more users, and more interest in the project right now. Then as the darknet develops, those who wish to use it will do so of their own volition. Right now, anyone who tries to check out freenet is thrown into a cumbersome under-construction network. And most of them don't even really know what darknet, opennet, etc.. mean. As I said, they just want to check it out. And above all of that, opennet is what freenet users are used to. Why should we wait for the functionality we have grown accustomed to in .5, while we wait on functionality that some of us don't even need or want? Anywho, that's my 2 cents from a ideological standpoint. I understand the technical aspects that need to be worked out, but maybe making the opennet the main, if not, sole focus until it is completed would be better for the network. On 7/11/06, Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 05:52:35PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote: > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > >No. Inserts don't collide. If they were to collide locally and then > > >stop, then you'd never be able to reinsert something, because it'd > still > > >be in your store; you get all sorts of problems. So resuming is > > >essential. > > > > I'm pretty sure they used to collide and that seemed like a pretty cool > > feature. Perhaps there was some option during insert on whether to allow > > local collisions or not, I don't recall. Apparently something has > changed. > > They don't collide. SSK inserts collide, and propagate pre-existing data > if it is different (both forwards and back). CHKs don't collide. In both > cases, the insert will complete even if the data is already there. This > means that the data will be propagated to the right place, even if it's > locally cached, which is important IMHO. > -- > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFEtEl1OHFIJVywduQRApTGAJ0WhD50r/yFaXRICLDnlX8ar02/wgCeNF3q > WFywBvcSFEbvK0DZAkeEwQk= > =KLef > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > Tech at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060711/e8c3b76f/attachment.html>
