Locutus Preview Released

An anonymous reader writes "FreeNet's Ian Clarke has released the preview version of his latest P2P endeavor Locutus. Aimed at the corporate world, Locutus adds encryption to the mix - new for a P2P client - to secure files traded across the network as well as the ability to scan within text files to improve search results. Locutus Lite is the free version for those who are more concerned with trading movies and tunes. Locutus Enterprise is the pay version that Clarke hopes to lure corporations to shell out money for (for secure trading of research and other documents). Those interested in trying the preview can download it here."

Comments

simpler solution for trading research

[macshune]

it's called e-mail with PGP.

Re:simpler solution for trading research

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely the best way for trading research would be with E-bay?

Re:simpler solution for trading research

[kalidasa]

Actually, no. E-mail with PGP wastes a lot of disk space in the enterprise that a P2P client won't - with a P2P client, you can just email everyone in a distribution list a path to a WP or other large doc and let those who might have a use for it look themselves. As a matter of fact, this is exactly what I need to solve a problem I'm having...

Locutus

[trotski]

This is Locutus of P2P You will be assimilated, resistance is futile!

who would pay for this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, why would anyone buy another application when they already have http and ftp sites, e-mail, etc? Most "research" isn't widely in demand enough to warrant the distribution model of p2p.

Re:who would pay for this?

[Elbereth]

p2p is ftp for idiots.

Who knows. Maybe there are a lot of idiots in management.

Re:who would pay for this?

[interiot]

At our site, we specifically have a separate system set up for spreading large files to our sites around the world. It only holds files for three days to emphasize its use as a transport agent and keep disk space down. If a department constantly uses a lot of disk space, sure, they should spend the money to get a proper ftp site. But if you send files only sporadically, and sometimes very large files, this can be good.

Also, it'd be nice to cut down on internet charges by using a local copy of the nightly builds if they're available, so something self-organizing like this would be nice.

Re:who would pay for this?

[Graspee_Leemoor]

"p2p is ftp for idiots."

Or people who actually want to find what they're looking for, with no stupid ratios, passwords changing every day...

Oh- you meant for legal stuff? Oh...

graspee

Re:who would pay for this?

[Sanity]

p2p is ftp for idiots.

I can't believe this was modded up. P2P is to FTP what Google is to HTTP.

Re:who would pay for this?

[GMontag451]

So you trade wading through ads, passwords, and ratios for wading through crap files, porn, and the complete lack of community. To each his own, I guess. I for one vastly prefer the old way of ftps, dccs, and hotline.

Re:who would pay for this?

[kalidasa]

p2p is ftp for idiots.

FTP doesn't have encryption. If you're going to compare it to another method, compare it to WS_FTP server or some other secure FTP server.

Re:who would pay for this?

[Graspee_Leemoor]

Not so- Sharereactor is an excellent community with very active bulletin boards, and the edonkey network's having hashes means I know exactly what file I am getting. The user comments and forums on sharereactor mean I have an idea of the quality of the file too.

Seriously, try it.

graspee

Why trade

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I want files on my computer that are of no use to me? Personaly I don't see why companys would pay for this, why not just use NFS, or FTP or even a webpage. P2P works off demand, not of this random need to swap (anyone over 14 that is).
-James

Re:Why trade

[KDan]

It's not your computer, it's your company's computer, and if your company wants to make use of the computer it bought for your use in order to spread the resource usage across the company and avoid having to buy another huge server (or several servers) to serve files around to all the branches of your company in the world, then it's damn right to do so.

Daniel

Good plan

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the way to guarantee real-world corporate interest, all right - name it after a lame geeky Star Trek reference.

And not even old series Star Trek that some of the upper management might at least feel nostalgia for.

Re:Good plan

[edhall]

It's Latin for "speak." Look up the English word "locution" (since I doubt most folks on this list have a Latin dictionary) and see.

-Ed

Re:Good plan

[Anonymous Coward]

I know the root. You're kidding yourself if you think this software was named after a Latin conjugate rather than a Star Trek reference.

Re:Good plan

[D iz a n k Meister]

That's like saying all 'data' is named after a cyborg on TNG.

Re:Good plan

[infornogr]

Android, not cyborg. He was comlpetely artificial.

Re:Good plan

[anaplasmosis]

Except that the Star Trek reference is itself based on the Latin verb "to speak" (see "interlocutor"). If you had a decent education, you'd know that...

This is great!

[cra]

Now the "movie stealers" can swap pirate movies without anybody finding out! I bet the big movie companies will have a look into this. . .

Re:This is great!

[anubi]

Encrypted or not, they will just set traps.

They will bait you to their site, and when you go onto their site to retrieve some file they say they have and attempt to download it, they will log where their server is sending it to.

And a letter from their legal counsel will go out in the next day's mail.

Sorry to rain on parade..but I do not think encryption is going to do much to help mask P2P filesharing itself... but it will help a lot in the sense that if you snared some file from someone's P2P server but did not know how to unlock it, you just get a file of something you can not use at all - it may as well be digitized interstation FM hiss for all you know. Or it might be configured so that if you do not know the access codes, you won't be able to get the remote server to send the file.

Re:This is great!

[magnum3065]

They will bait you to their site, and when you go onto their site to retrieve some file they say they have and attempt to download it, they will log where their server is sending it to.

And a letter from their legal counsel will go out in the next day's mail.

Well, IANAL, but that sounds like entrapment, which is illegal.

Re:This is great!

[KDan]

Indeed, it is illegal, in most civilised parts of the world anyway. That's like a cop selling you some cocaine and then arresting you for possession.

On top of it, I doubt that "attempted to download an mp3" will be held as a criminal offence anywhere but in the most risible courts of law.

Daniel

Re:This is great!

[Narcissus]

Well, IANAL, but isn't entrapment where they convince you to do something that you otherwise would not have done? If they don't force you or pressure you into downloading the file (as opposed to just encouraging you to do so) then it isn't entrapment...

Re:This is great!

[fenix down]

Encouragement is still entrapment. A cop can't wander up to you, offer you drugs and then arrest you if you accept. I don't think they've ever had police FORCE somebody to commit a crime, at least not this century. It doesn't matter though, since it's not the cops doing it. Entrapment doesn't apply to Sony sending you threats and reposessing your stereo. Not only is it not police setting the trap, it's probably going to stay in the civil courts, where you can basically do whatever the hell you want.

Re:This is great!

[GMontag451]

That wouldn't work. By letting you download their own copyrighted material, they have authorized you to use it. Also, the question of who is actually making the copy, the downloader or the downloadee has yet to be decided in court. If it goes to the downloadee, then no sort of baiting tricks will work legally, as they would be the ones doing the copying, not you.

Re:This is great!

[anubi]

Yeh, I was just thinking of the "sting" operations you see on those cop shows all the time.

I seem to recall they were using female cops posing as prostitutes to nail the johns.

Re:This is great!

[anon*127.0.0.1]

A cop selling you some cocaine, then arresting you.. . what do you think undercover narcs do? It's only entrapment if the cop induces you to do something illegal that you wouldn't otherwise have done. The line between the cop saying "Hey, want to buy some cocaine?", and the suspect saying "Hey, will you sell me some cocaine?"

As far as it applies to P2P... hell if I know. The user initiates the search, which could be construed as initiating the transaction. But you could also argue that the user wasn't necessarily looking for copyrighted material, they just happened to see it while cruising for legal .mp3 files. I'm sure it will be resolved in court after hundreds of hours of legal arguments and millions and millions of dollars transferred to the lawyers bank accounts.

Re:This is great!

[op00to]

A police office saying "Here, want to buy this dope" IS entrapment. A police officer having dope out on the table, and you asking for it ISN'T entrapment. Of course, people who commit drug crimes have no rights anyway, so this is a moot point. Maybe people will start getting pissed off when they treat P2P'ers like they treat pot smokers. Pot smokers are too peaceful (stoned?) to get really pissed off and change things.

Re:This is great!

[op00to]

Yeah, notice the bitch cops will do every suggestive act short of touching the guy or propositioning him in explicit language to get him to offer a "price", at which time 5-10 armed officers come out with guns drawn to someone who just throught he was gonna get some...Oh yeah, where's Osama?

Re:This is great!

[pod]

In any case, catching YOU uploading those files to someone else is much better than just catching you downloading. One is marely a crime of opportunity, the other is more serious.

Re:This is great!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"

Buffy is the best show on tv.

Re:This is great!

[Anonymous Coward]

Buffy? It's from Being John Malkovich. But, Buffy is a pretty damn good show.

great...

[Anonymous Coward]

> Locutus Lite is the free version for those who are more concerned with trading movies and tunes.

Yeah, right, that's the ticket for gaining credibility.

Microsoft..

[anubi]

I think this is one of the things that peeve me so much about their "improvements"... from the Locutus site mentioned...

The application is only 400k in size, but many users will notice that the download is over 20MB. This is because Locutus relies on Microsoft's .NET framework, and if a user doesn't have .NET they will automatically download a version of the installer that does.

Damm!

Locutus does look nifty though in that the files can be shared encrypted.. I take it that one must pass muster to even look at the filenames though.. otherwise what difference is it from sharing files already encrypted with pgp or similar...

Re:Microsoft..

[Forgotten]

Well, that explains the name.

Re:Microsoft..

[MisterFancypants]

Here we are, facing a world where bandwidth is at a premium, and viral infections are running rampant, and we code some application that takes 20 MEGAbytes of loader to transfer a 400K File? C'mon! Is there any common sense left in programming any more?

Just like the ~20 megabytes you need if you download a Java application. Its called a runtime environment. It consists of the virtual machine that runs .NET code, plus all the APIs/libraries that go along with such. It is a one time download and then you can run any .NET application. Future versions of Windows will have the .NET framework pre-installed.

All in all you're making a whole lot of noise for nothing. This is absolutely no different than the "bloat" one has to endure to download Perl if one wants to run Perl scripts, Python for Python scripts, or the Java Runtime Environment for Java programs. As with all of those situations it either a one time download, or no worries at all if it is preinstalled in the OS (which will be the case for .NET moving forward). The only difference is this is Microsoft, so you're quick to bash them because you're an ignorant asshole.

Re:Microsoft..

[Shippy]

Uh, it's a ONE TIME DOWNLOAD! Once you download the .NET framework once, you can run any .NET application. If they install it by default, you complain about bloat. If they give it as a separate download, you whine about big downloads. You have to do the same thing if you're going to run a Java app. You have to do a big 15MB JVM download to run a 200k Java app. Same idea...

Re:Microsoft..

[toriver]

Just like the ~20 megabytes you need if you download a Java application.

Except that the Java runtime isn't 20 megabytes, but 10, and that's the international version of 1.4.1 - most applications can get by on the 8 megs download for 1.3.1.

The .Net runtime is large mostly because of its support for multiple languages, a problem that Java avoids.

Re:Microsoft..

[anubi]

Thanks, Mr. Fancypants.

I stand corrected. I plead ignorance.

I thought this 20 megabyte thing was Microsoft's version of a loader.

Being I am an old DOS guy who used to store things on 360K floppy disks ( and it took sometimes weeks of work to fill one of those with decent code )... the thought of 20 megabytes sent me through the roof. ( The DOS kernel - COMMAND COM 54,619 09-30-93 6:20a )

I've just seen so much stuff come out of that company I considered bloatware, and everyone just seemed to take it with a grain of salt and move on. To me, this one just seemed to take the cake. I work mostly with robots using assembler codes on Motorola 68K processors. I have yet to fill up a pair of 27C512 with code, and often have to use all sorts of code and hardware debuggers in tandem to isolate trouble spots at the register/interface level. There's where my alarm on file size springs from.

Re:Microsoft..

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry to correct you (not trying to pick on you or anything), but the DOS kernel is IO.SYS, and even it is about 200K. COMMAND.COM is only the shell. In fact, in CONFIG.SYS you can add SHELL= and set %COMSPEC% to a different path and not use COMMAND.COM at all.

I do agree with you that Microsoft has been pushing a lot of seemingly bloated products these days, however I remember thinking QuickC was large because it used 3 disks, and WinNT 3.5 was HUGE because it used 11MB of RAM and over 100MB hard disk space. Microsoft has always pushed the requirement envelope with their high end products. Although in their defence, WinXP will still run decently on a P166 with 64MB of RAM (with the themes service off), and that is quite old HW by now.

Re:Microsoft..

[Jugalator]

Actually, the Borg could have a far worse destiny than being controlled by Bill Gates. Read on... :-)

The Microsoft Borg

(Picard) "Mr. LaForge, have you had any success with your attempts at finding a weakness in the Borg? And Mr. Data, have you been able to access their command pathways?"

(Geordi)"Yes, Captain. In fact, we found the answer by searching through our archives on late Twentieth-century computing technology." (Geordi presses a key, and a logo appears on the computer screen.)

(Riker looks puzzled.) "What the hell is 'Microsoft'?" (Data turns to answer.) "Allow me to explain. We will send this program, for some reason called 'Windows', through the Borg command pathways. Once inside their root command unit,it will begin consuming system resources at an unstoppable rate."

(Picard) "But the Borg have the ability to adapt. Won't they alter their processing systems to increase their storage capacity?"

(Data) "Yes, Captain. But when 'Windows' detects this, it creates a new version of itself known as an 'upgrade'. The use of resources increases exponentially with each iteration. The Borg will not be able to adapt quickly enough. Eventually all of their processing ability will be taken over and none will be available for their normal operational functions."

(Picard) "Excellent work. This is even better than that 'unsolvable geometric shape' idea." .. . . 15 Minutes Later . . .

(Data) "Captain, We have successfully installed the 'Windows' in the command unit and as expected it immediately consumed 85% of all resources. We however have not received any confirmation of the expected 'upgrade'."

(Geordi) "Our scanners have picked up an increase in Borg storage and CPU capacity to compensate, but we still have no indication of an 'upgrade' to compensate for their increase."

(Picard) "Data, scan the history banks again and determine if there is something we have missed."

(Data) "Sir, I believe there is a reason for the failure in the 'upgrade'. Apparently the Borg have circumvented that part of the plan by not sending in their registration cards.

(Riker) "Captain we have no choice. Requesting permission to begin emergency escape sequence 3F . . ."

(Geordi, excited) "Wait, Captain I just detected their CPU capacity has suddenly dropped to 0% !"

(Picard) "Data, what do your scanners show?"

(Data) "Apparently the Borg have found the internal 'Windows' module named 'Solitaire' and it has used up all the CPU capacity."

(Picard) "Let's wait and see how long this 'solitaire' can reduce their functionality." .. . . Two Hours Pass . . .

(Riker) "Geordi, what's the status of the Borg?"

(Geordi) "As expected the Borg are attempting to re-engineer to compensate for increased CPU and storage demands, but each time they successfully increase resources I have set up our closest deep space monitor beacon to transmit more 'Windows' modules from something called the 'Microsoft fun-pack'.

(Picard) "How much time will that buy us?"

(Data) "Current Borg solution rates allow me to predict an interest time span of 6 more hours."

(Geordi) "Captain, another vessel has entered our sector."

(Picard) "Identify."

(Data) "It appears to have markings very similar to the 'Microsoft' logo."

(Over the speakers) "THIS IS ADMIRAL BILL GATES OF THE MICROSOFT FLAGSHIP 'MONOPOLY'. WE HAVE POSITIVE CONFIRMATION OF UNREGISTERED SOFTWARE IN THIS SECTOR. SURREDER ALL ASSETS AND WE CAN AVOID ANY TROUBLE. YOU HAVE 10 SECONDS."

(Data) "The alien ship has just opened its forward hatches and released thousands of humanoid shaped objects."

(Picard) "Magnify forward viewer on the alien craft."

(Riker) "Good God, Captain! Those are humans floating straight toward the Borg ship with no life support suits! How can they survive the tortures of deep space?!"

(Data) "I don't believe that those are humans,sir. If you will look closer I believe you will see that they are carrying something recognized by Twenty-first Century man as doe skin leather briefcases, and they are wearing Armani suits."

(Riker and Picard together, horrified) "Lawyers!!"

(Geordi) "It can't be. All the Lawyers were rounded up and sent hurtling into the sun in 2017 during the Great Awakening."

(Data) "True, but apparently some must have survived."

(Riker) "They have surrounded the Borg ship and are covering it with all types of papers."

(Data) "I believe that is known in ancient vernacular as 'red tape'. It often proves fatal."

(Riker) "They're tearing the Borg to pieces!"

(Picard) "Turn off the monitors. I can't stand to watch, not even the Borg deserve that.

Re:Microsoft..

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for the reminder.

There were two files.. io.sys and msdos.sys, in addition to command,com that got transferred to the disk if I made a bootable floppy...

Somehow I did not remember them as being very big, but then its been some time since I have even seen them, being they never gave me any trouble or reason to mess with them. They were so innoccous I darned near forgot about them.

I mostly used the bios and system interrupts ( as shown in any decent assembler book ), things worked, and I let it go at that.

When Windows came out, I migrated to the API, which worked much the same, but called the basic GUI services instead of the elemental BIOS routines. If I got lazy, I would use the MFC which would somewhat encapsulate a lot of the API, but when push comes to a shove, I still felt comfortable around the API. But, turn your back for a second and I am back in the assembler.

I think that's why I am so suspicious of .NET. I do not understand yet what was wrong with API or MFC. The further I get away from knowing exactly how the software and hardware interact, the antsier I get.

I guess I flew off the handle a bit when I wrote the add-on post that was immediately modded to (-1 ,troll ). It just seems that everytime I get something to work, they change it so I have to do everything all over again.. and my joy has never been coding - my joy has always been getting my robots to work right... something about having the differential equations governing the motion of their arms being executed in such a smooth manner as to where the robot almost seems to be dancing while its doing its assembly work. Its a constant game of mass, forces of acceleration, and resonance. Having multiple joints moving in different directions at different speeds so the forces of acceleration, which drive resonances, cancel.

Having some big software company mandating change of the platforms I am using just did not sit well with me. Hence, the rant.

I realize small companies, such as the ones I work for, really can't afford to re-do things every time the fashion of computing trends change. I think another way of saying it is that it takes me too long to get something to work. By the time I get it working, the platform I designed it for is obsolete. To me, its like trying to design the Hoover Dam, but by the time I get everything in place, I can no longer buy the generators I designed the mounts for. And the whole time, I was trying to design something that would produce power for at least a century. For me, I have to sell product.

Re:Microsoft..

[Woy]

The only difference is this is Microsoft, so you're quick to bash them because you're an ignorant asshole.

"Ignorant asshole", modded at +5 Insightful.

Ouch!

Re:Microsoft..

[op00to]

I smell RIPOFF. Try at least saying this isn't yours. Ripping off other people's work is pretty lame, even for karma.

Google #1
Google #2
Ahh, take the whole damn thing.

Re:Microsoft..

[MisterFancypants]

I feel bad about the comment too now that the guy apologized for being wrong. I thought he was aware of what the .NET runtime was but was bashing it because it was Microsoft.

Sorry, original poster. My last sentence there was a bit harsh.

Re:Microsoft..

[Jugalator]

It isn't mine. :-)

I didn't do it for karma (I think I'm already maxed), I did it for *your* amusement and since it fit the topic. Strange, huh?

Re:Microsoft..

[bblgoose]

WinXP will still run decently on a P166 with 64MB of RAM (with the themes service off), and that is quite old HW by now

Indeed...I'm running .net Server on a P200/64MB quite happily at home. Terminal services drags it's heels a bit, but other than that it runs fine. Haven't quite dared to install Exchange Server on it yet though :-)

If it's on slashdot...

[Velocity4]

Hey, If it's on slashdot, think how many geeks will be using it. And what do geeks have? Yes, they have it all. Warez, Mp3s, and.. yes, that too.

I'm checking it out. Are you?

+No spyware, woohoo! I would like it if it could hack into the kazaa network thought.

Locutus Preview?

[dupper]

Q Who?

(Score:-1, Trekkie/Obscure)

Yes. Fuck it

[Anonymous Coward]

That's your answer to everything. Isn't it, Mr. Lebowski?

My advice, get a job sir.

What's wrong with other tools?

[oingoboingo]

Locutus Enterprise is the pay version that Clarke hopes to lure corporations to shell out money for (for secure trading of research and other documents).

Maybe I'm missing a point somewhere here...what's wrong with centralised file/document servers, or groupware like Notes, GroupWise or Exchange for sharing documents and research within a company? Why P2P? Will we look back at these stories in a couple of years and think the same way about them as we now do with stories about 'Java applications storming the desktop', 'Push applications redefining the way we work on the net', or 'Debian releases new version before 2025'?

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[Sanity]

what's wrong with centralised file/document servers?

How much of the average knowledge worker's output gets uploaded to centralized file servers or websites? Over 80% of a corporation's data still resides on their employee's desktop computers - and as was demonstrated by Napster, P2P is very good indeed when it comes to searching desktop PCs.

Will we look back at these stories in a couple of years and think the same way about them as we now do with stories about...

...or 'Web to revolutionize the way we look for information' - hmmmm, perhaps some buzzwords do live up to the hype.

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[oingoboingo]

How much of the average knowledge worker's output gets uploaded to centralized file servers or websites?

We have a fairly simple solution to that problem where I work (apart from all the usual lectures from the sysadmin staff about saving work onto the file servers etc etc)...only install 4GB drives into the desktops. After you've installed Windows and a few key apps, there isn't too much space left over for any data. I guess you could fake it out with larger hard drives by only making a very small partition and leaving the majority of the drive unpartitioned (and thus unavailable to the average non-admin/root user).

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[Anonymous Coward]

How much of the average knowledge worker's output gets uploaded to centralized file servers or websites?

Roughly all of it, in any organisation where I've been a sysadmin. There's no excuse for people saving nonpersonal files on a local desktop - and if they save personal files there, they'll know there's no backup done and they can be clobbered at any time.

It's entirely possible that you're correct about the 80% figure, but only because people are doing a piss-poor job of organising IT. It requires a very small amount of effort to set things up so that people will naturally use central file servers, a teeny bit more to educate them, and the saved time in the long run is beyond measure.

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[cthugha]

What's wrong with the file-sharing capabilities built in to most OSs? I mean, yes, most organizations use MS, which means that file-sharing is most likely very weak and full of holes, but there's nothing to say that this new product is necessarily more secure on an MS platform, and when configured properly and put behind a firewall/VPN, there's no reason why traditional file-sharing shouldn't prove adequate enough to prevent looking elsewhere. It also has a number of advantages, such as integration with the filesystem, thus allowing traversal of the distributed file store with any tool that understands the OS's filesystem API.

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree, in my old workplace we all had multiple shares on our workstations and a huge NT file server for such a purpose. Windows sharing (with the AppleShare support) worked fine for most of our purposes, we were even able to burn ISO images at 8x over the network.

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[Sanity]

What's wrong with the file-sharing capabilities built in to most OSs?

Imagine you have 10,000 desktop PCs in your company, and you want to find a document about "freenet" and "locutus". You know that it is on someone's shared drive, but how do you find out where it is?

That is the problem that Locutus solves.

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a problem that only exists in an organisation with no sense to start with. And this is a questionable customer base.

If this is your storage solution, how do you even know whether the PCs with the files you need are switched on? What do you do when they get hosed?

If the file is important enough for more than one person to ever need it, it's important enough to exist centrally on a backed-up and redundant store. Turning desktop PCs into the SAN is precisely the wrong approach for oh-so-many reasons.

Selling people this as the type of solution you suggest is simply a tragic disservice.

Re:What's wrong with other tools?

[cthugha]

Or, since all the file-shares are presented to userland via the OS's filesystem layer (as I mentioned in my original reply), you could use your platform's equivalent of rgrep. All those handy tools you use to search your own local volumes can be easily applied to the file-share network.

Another 20MB.

[$$$$$exyGal]

The application is only 400k in size, but many users will notice that the download is over 20MB. This is because Locutus relies on Microsoft's .NET framework, and if a user doesn't have .NET they will automatically download a version of the installer that does.

For some reason, that paragraph really cracked me up...

--naked

Re:Another 20MB.

[gutier]

I for one am extremely happy with the .NET framework. It is a comprehensive box of functionality that all .NET applications can make use of. Many useful applications I've written in .NET have been under 200K in size. Comparable programs I've written in Linux are all over 200K in size. This is after having to deal with the incredible mash of libraries that simply don't work well together. Why? Well, how about the amazing number of reimplementations of method pointers, having to deal with C++ libraries and C libraries and woes arising thereof, exceptions in some libraries and return codes in others, all different kinds of naming conventions and the bazillion mappings of this over that.

I've found that programming in .NET is actually a lot like programming in Python (a nice language and a clean, integrated box of functionality, and NOT like Perl/CPAN with for all the same Linux-related reasons again ... ). Given .NET's intended domain (which is Windows software running on Windows), it is very well done.

Let's give up the religious dogma, emotional outbursts and reactivity, and evaluate it objectively. Objective evaluation of a complete situation is what they really tried to teach you in college.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Forgotten]

Well, there's always another level to a complete appraisal. Many people object to .Net because promulgating it furthers goals of Microsoft's which they object to. That's a perfectly reasonably objection, and by that yardstick your observation that it works well for some purposes is largely irrelevant.
Don't assume that mere dogma underlies every opinion opposed to yours.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, two highly moderated .NET evangelists before the 20th post. What's going on at Microsoft?

Re:Another 20MB.

[grazzy]

omg, this has to be a troll?

did you link your 200k+ programs in linux staticlly then or what?

and i dont think "hello world" counts as a very good example of "method pointers", nor i belive its a incredible mash of libraries.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Anonymous Coward]

I do not know, but speak bad of them and you will get trounced.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Anonymous Coward]

-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2617968 Feb 9 00:54 /usr/bin/vim

Re:Another 20MB.

[Gadzinka]

Given .NET's intended domain (which is Windows software running on Windows), it is very well done.

Am I the only one who considers this funny? Going to such lengths as installing new, (at least now) poorly supported virtual machine with its set of strange libraries and bindings only to run Windows software on Windows?

What's wrong with running Windows software on Windows without any intermediary vm?

Robert

Re:Another 20MB.

[jgerman]

Err, I'm certainly not bahing .NET, I haven't playied with it enough to really form an opinion. However, your argument doesn't hold water. Of course your applications are smaller in .NET. You're making almost exclusive use of shared libraries. I can do the same in Linux, as far as a mash of libraries not working well together, that's unsupported FUD. The size of a program is not a good indicator by itself, static or shared libraries, and the skill of the coder involved play a large role, as I'm sure other factors (which aren't coming to me at four in the morning) do as well.

You're right though, .NET in it's intended domain is well done. But of course it would be. It's not religous dogma, it's fact. MS bullied around Java until they could rip it off and implement it on their systems ala C# and .NET. Even not being a Windows guy, I'm willing to admint that C# is great it's well integrated in the environment, but let's face facts... it's Java. It's typical MS business practice, break a third party tool until they can entrench users in using the MS version. It works, it's immoral, but it works.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Anonymous Coward]

omg you must be a troll. obviously his 200K apps are a bit more complex than hello world. And for your information, hello world uses libc, which is not all that small the last time I checked it. Before we get to bitching about the size of .NET remember that to do the same on Linux you would have to install libc, pcap, xlib and multiple other libraries that would probably come near the 20MB mark.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Anonymous Coward]

What's wrong with running Windows software on Windows without any intermediary vm?

The idea behind .NET is that .NET apps will be protable across multiple platforms once MS writes VM's for those platforms, just like Java. The same argument could have been used for the JRE years ago when it was a slow piece of trash that ran a few apps on solaris.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Anonymous Coward]

1. It provides a comprehensive standard platform with which to develop software
2. It provides a framework for what Java claimed to be for, only its design is better
3. It provides a framework for what Java ended up being used for, only it does it better.
4. It no doubt fits in nicely with Microsofts plans for spreading its disease to IA64
5. It probably fits in with their DRM plans

Re:Another 20MB.

[Anonymous Coward]

C# and the .NET framework just happen to be better than Java. Not unlike Microsoft's extensions of Java were in the first place.

If you think there's really and standard means for handling datatypes, handling errors, or that there's any sort of global code reuse across the multitudes of libraries available on linux, you've never really developed squat. You end up with multiple layers of indirection to provide a "standard" interface for the functionality of a half dozen other libraries, and then it just happens that three other projects do the same thing, only differently. Then the usage by other libraries or applications either forks, or another layer of indirection is added to support each of these other frameworks. This is slow and wasteful and just so happens to provide a good deal of bloat and/or dependency issues.

It's not as if the Windows world is particularly different.

Re:Another 20MB.

[AirLace]

Comparable programs I've written in Linux are all over 200K in size.

This application I'm developing in Gtk# to deploy on Linux must be a dream, then?

Why do you feel the need to put down Linux when you talk about the strengths of .NET? Has it ever occurred to you that thousands of people are writing C# programs on Linux already using Mono, with the additional stability and estabilshed development environment provided therein (emacs, vim)?

Re:Another 20MB.

[grazzy]

nooot the same thing! .net already uses 200mb of windows dlls

ac coward.

Re:Another 20MB.

[Reziac]

Actually, my first thought was "and if I install this .NET framework, what might it break??" My next was "will it only work on the XP box?" About that point, I began losing interest in the product.

military grade!

[Mr Foot]

The commercial version of Locutus, Locutus Enterprise, will enforce "military grade" encryption over all files shared.

Re:military grade!

[Anonymous Coward]

military grade... means having a Secret Government Property label on the box?

Need simple solution for Penis stuck inside mom

[Anonymous Coward]

any suggestions appreciated

Locutus Enterprise

[Xpilot]

Didn't Locutus try to destroy Enterprise? And Enterprise tried to destroy Locutus too. Hrmmm... Sleep Data, sleep...

No pr0n?

[Velocity4]

I noticed when I was setting it up that it only adds the file extensions of .doc .htm .html .mp3 .ppt and .txt - Does this mean no movies/wares?

Also, Amazing, I just did a search for pr0n (spelt correctly)... and nothing turned up! Jeez slashdotters, you guys arn't what you used to be...

Re:No pr0n?

[anubi]

Hehehe... Just rename your *.warez (whatever it is ) to *.ppt and transfer it. Let the people you are trying to share with know the filename.

Let the **AA people read and poke through every .ppt file on the net. It'll build character.

so in essence....

[zogger]

....so in essence the good part is, this is an easy to set up secure WAN with restricted users and groups.

The bad part could be you have to be "microsoft dot netted".

hmmmmm

Re:so in essence....

[Shippy]

I'm sure as soon as the Mono project gets far along enough you'll be able to run it under Linux, FreeBSD, etc. That's the whole goal of Mono, to provide an open-source version of the .NET common language runtime environment so it can run on other systems. This is actually something Microsoft touts as a benefit of .NET -- portability. Except, in their eyes, you write one piece of software and it runs on WinXP, WinCE, Win64, etc.

Re:so in essence....

[tulare]

Shippy, before you go spouting off about how it's not so bad as we do have Mono available, will you please read their fucking website? Jeezus, dude, the developer states explicitly that Locutus will not be an open-source app. There goes your portability. It's windoze, and only windoze.

Re:so in essence....

[KDan]

Don't .NET programs come in a kind of bytecode like java? I thought that was the whole point of copying the Java idea. In which case they should be equally portable on all those platforms.

Daniel

Re:so in essence....

[Narcissus]

Maybe before you knock Shippy you should try and understand what Mono is. Locutus runs in .NET. Mono is an open source implementation of the .NET framework. .NET is designed to be cross platform! Ask Microsoft, 'cause they'll tell you straight away: bring on the competition, bring on the other OSes. The portability comes in the VM (ie. .NET, Mono) not the application that runs on it. Read that again. Now again.

So, like, Jeezus, dude, please understand their fucking technologies before asking people to "please read their fucking website".

Re:so in essence....

[kalidasa]

Shippy, before you go spouting off about how it's not so bad as we do have Mono available, will you please read their fucking website? Jeezus, dude, the developer states explicitly that Locutus will not be an open-source app. There goes your portability. It's windoze, and only windoze.

Read further: they explicitly mention that they hope Mono to make it possible for them to make their software available on non-Windows platforms.

This has got to be the worst idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

...since Greedo fired first.

Re:This has got to be the worst idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

since Greedo SHOOTING first!

Loser.

Re:This has got to be the worst idea...

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to do some more studying on the view askew-niverse.

Billyborg

[anagama]

The application is only 400k in size, but many users will notice that the download is over 20MB. This is because Locutus relies on Microsoft's .NET framework, and if a user doesn't have .NET they will automatically download a version of the installer that does.

Go figure - Locutus only works with Windows.

Re:Billyborg

[gimpimp]

there's always mono. i haven't read much on the site, but if they make an api available, then someone could make a nix port.

Re:Billyborg

[tulare]

According to the locutus faq, the developers will not be releasing source to the app. Doesn't look like they're interested in ports.

Re:Billyborg

[toriver]

Well, according to some pro-MS guy who finds it in his heart to hang around on comp.lang.java.advocacy, .Net exists for the same platforms as Java - so it should be cross-platform.

Unless he was lying, of course.

Re:Billyborg

[nitehorse]

According to MicroSoft, anyone who implements the .NET interpreter will be able to run .NET software.

Therefore, despite their refusal to release source, they might end up being portable anyway.

Kind of like StarCraft works on Linux (through wine), even though Blizzard will never write a Linux version.

Closed source doesn't necessarily mean that the application will ONLY run on one OS. Keep that in mind.

Re:Billyborg

[Anonymous Coward]

Running on x86 Linux (maybe) is not portability. It's binary compatibility (WINE was never much use on my PPC Linux notebook).
Portability requires source, more or less by definition.

Re:Billyborg

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed about portability, but it's possible that the Locutus package is entirely pseudocode of some kind. It might be as portable as a Java app, given the existence of an interpreter for each target hardware and software platform.
Pcode compatibility is still closer to ABI compatibility than "true" portability (whatever that grail is), but it might at least work on other Linux hardware platforms besides x86.

Re:Billyborg

[blowdart]

Portability requires source, more or less by definition.

Tell that to Sun : "write once, run anywhere"

FAQ

[Mdog]

(Site slashdotted)

1 General
1.1 What is Locutus?
Locutus is a .Net application that will allow you to search for files on your hard disk and on other people's shared folders on your LAN, and on the Internet as a whole.
1.2 Why is Locutus a 20MB download?
In fact, Locutus itself is only about 400k in size, however it relies on Microsoft's .NET framework. Not everyone has a version of Windows which includes .NET, and so if you try to download Locutus and don't have .NET you will automatically download a version of the installer which includes it. The next time you upgrade Locutus, or any other .NET software, you will find that the download is much smaller. You can find out whether you have .NET by visiting the Downloads page.
1.25 Why is slashdot so fucking retarded?
It's because people aren't aware that the editors are facist morons. Read ths signature for this post and find out more.
1.3 I've installed it - now what?
When you run Locutus, you should see a discrete search box at the bottom right of your screen. You can enter search terms into this box, and Locutus will search your computer, along with the shared directories of other Locutus users on your LAN. The more of your co-workers that use Locutus, the more useful it will be, so email them now and direct them to http://locut.us/!
1.4 What is the difference between Locutus and other P2P applications?
There are a number of important differences:

* Detailed file analysis
Most P2P applications just search on the basis of a filename or superficial data about the files being searched. Locutus will scan documents in their entirity, extracting significant keywords - using technology similar to that used by web search engines.
* Scalable and efficient search algorithm
Locutus employs a sophisticated decentralized search algorithm which can rapidly search tens or hundreds of thousands of computers in a very short space of time, and without any reliance on inefficient "broadcast" searches, or fragile "ultrapeers". This effeciency dramatically reduces Locutus' bandwidth requirements relative to more conventional P2P applications.
* Strong security model
With most P2P apps, you are either sharing a file or you are not - and often you can accidentally end up sharing files that you didn't intend to share. Locutus allows finer control over who can search which folders on your computer, and in the upcoming Enterprise release, will enforce this security using military-grade encryption.

1.5 What is the difference between Locutus and a web Search Engine?
Web search engines only search information publicly available on the Internet, and they do so in a totally centralized manner. Locutus can search the hard-disks of desktop PCs (within constraints defined by the PC's user) in a completely decentralized manner. Locutus doesn't require that a server be set up - you just download, install, and you can start using it immediately!
2 Using Locutus
2.1 Does Locutus allow others to see my private files?
No! Locutus will only allow others to search for files in shared directories on your computer, or files that you have deliberately placed in the Locutus shared folder on your desktop.
2.2 Will Locutus slow down my computer?
While the built-in Windows indexing service is well-known for slowing down the user's computer, Locutus is much more careful about its resource usage. Initially Locutus does need to create an index of your hard-disk, however once this is done, Locutus is careful only to reindex files when necessary (ie. when they change, or when a new file is created). In practice, Locutus doesn't have any negative effect on system performance once the initial indexing is complete - you won't even know its there.
3 Microsoft's .Net
3.1 What is .Net and why does Locutus need it? .Net is, at its core, an attempt to standardize the way that software applications communicate with the underlying Operating System. .Net was developed by Microsoft, and at the time of writing is only available for Windows, however .Net has been embraced by some in the Linux community who are working on Open Source versions of .Net such as Mono. Once finished, these will allow Locutus to run on non-Microsoft operating systems.
3.2 I heard that .Net can compromise your privacy - is this true?
There was some controversy over a Microsoft product called "Passport" which Microsoft marketed under the .Net banner - however Passport is not required by Locutus, and is not included in the Locutus installer.

We value our privacy, and respect yours. We would never ask you to install anything that we wouldn't install on our own computers.
4 Business Model
4.1 Many P2P applications include Spyware - what about Locutus?
No, Locutus does not include any advertising, nor will it install any third-party advertising or data-collection software.
4.2 If not advertising, what is your business model?
We plan to give Locutus Prototype and Locutus Lite (available late January 2003) for free. Those who require enhanced security or other features will have the opportunity to purchase Locutus Enterprise when it is released in March 2003.
4.3 Who do I contact if I am interested in a business relationship with Cematics LLC?
Cematics is a young and flexible company, and are always on the look-out for new collaboration opportunities. If you are interested in a business relationship with Cematics LLC, please email our business development group at bizdev@locut.us.
4.4 Will Locutus be released as Open Source software?
While we are big fans of Open Source software, we do not feel that there is a viable business model for us that would allow us to release Locutus as Open Source. We will, however, be developing ways that third-party software developers can write software which integrates with Locutus.
Index

1 General
1.1 What is Locutus?
1.2 Why is Locutus a 20MB download?
1.3 I've installed it - now what?
1.4 What is the difference between Locutus and other P2P applications?
1.5 What is the difference between Locutus and a web Search Engine?

2 Using Locutus
2.1 Does Locutus allow others to see my private files?
2.2 Will Locutus slow down my computer?

3 Microsoft's .Net
3.1 What is .Net and why does Locutus need it?
3.2 I heard that .Net can compromise your privacy - is this true?

4 Business Model
4.1 Many P2P applications include Spyware - what about Locutus?
4.2 If not advertising, what is your business model?
4.3 Who do I contact if I am interested in a business relationship with Cematics LLC?
4.4 Will Locutus be released as Open Source software?
Copyright © 2003 Cematics, LLC

Re:FAQ

[Malcontent]

Is there anything more lame then a person who complains about slashdot?

Re:FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

nice job. it made me laugh at your post & the dipshit who modded you informative

Re:FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

>Quoth Mike Hunter:
>> Cherish my balls as though they were a tootsie-pop which you were
>> determined to lick through to the creamy center.

>If only we knew how many licks it would take.

The world may never know.

Re:FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

The person who complains about that person, obviously. And possibly slashdot itself (and thus each and every one of its users, regardless of their complainant status).

Re:FAQ

[assaultriflesforfree]

Mod parent down.

My take on Locutus:

Maybe some of their algorithmic innovations are valuable, but as for the whole model, I really don't see a necessity for it. Encrypted P2P might be nice, I suppose. But it seems like secure web servers have been providing the same functionality for years.

Chemfinder has a nice model they've been using for sharing of research. Most of the information there, from my understanding, is submitted and reviewed for entry into the database. Complete with subscription options.


On another note...
A couple things I like about Slashdot: a) Users generally engage in intelligent discussion without calling the content of the entire site "so fucking retarded."

b) The editing is actually quite good. Much better than kuro5hin.org, from what I can tell at least. You can actually find interesting, well written articles, as well as read responses from a wide variety of professional, political, and social cross-sections.

c) Slashdot is a user moderated news site. As it is well recognized that nobody really wants to hear about Pepsi's new flavor when reading about Oracle security problems, comments focusing on Pepsi's new flavor under articles concerning Oracle security problems are modded down. Likewise, articles for the sole purpose of bitching and moaning about unrelated topics are also modded down when they are included under articles concerning Oracle security problems. Following that logic, the parent and this reply should be modded down. So somebody fucking do it.

Re:FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

How about the person who replies to the person who complains about the other person?

Re:FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

c) Slashdot is a user moderated news site.

Hmm...

Re:FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. YOU!

Re:wrong icon

[Shippy]

No, because this isn't directly related to Microsoft. If it was "Microsoft Locutus" and it was their venture into the p2p market, then it would prolly warrant that icon. It just happens to run on Windows.

Trademark...

[po8]

I hope Ian has gotten permission to use the name Locutus, which is, no surprise, a trademark of Paramount. Info below.

(BTW, why does Slashdot not allow <pre> tags but allow text-only postings and the obvious <tt>...<br> thing? What a pain.)

Word Mark LOCUTUS
Goods and Services IC 028. US 022.
G & S: toys; namely, action figures and accessories therefor, poseable figures, dolls.
FIRST USE: 19930600.
FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19930600
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 74462053
Filing Date November 12, 1993
Published for Opposition August 23, 1994
Registration Number 1862622
Registration Date November 15, 1994
Owner (REGISTRANT) PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION
CORPORATION DELAWARE
5555 Melrose Avenue Los Angeles CALIFORNIA 900383197
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Affidavit Text SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR).
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

Re:Trademark...

[MisterFancypants]

Goods and Services IC 028. US 022. G & S: toys; namely, action figures and accessories therefor, poseable figures, dolls.

I don't think this software qualifies as a toy, action figure, poseable figure or a doll. You do understand how trademarks work, don't you?

Re:Trademark...

[po8]

The way I understand it, as with copyright, a trademark need not be registered to be protected. Registering a trademark for the name Locutus in connection with action figures is likely to establish Paramount's right to the name in other contexts. With an obviously invented name like "Locutus", the onus may be on the defendant in an infringement suit. Keep in mind that the Lanham Act is quite broad: the "dilution" argument may provide a basis for a successful suit in this situation.

Besides, remember the golden rule of lawsuits: if you are Ian, and you are sued by Paramount, you lose, because Paramount can afford to fight the suit forever out of pocket change and run you bankrupt before justice is done. Much better to pick a name that is either clearly conventional or clearly unique, to avoid trouble from the beginning.

Re:Trademark...

[Iffy Bonzoolie]

I think people used for those page-widening posts you used to hear so much about.

-If

Re:Trademark...

[bigmattana]

You do understand how trademarks work, don't you?

Maybe you could fill us in instead of acting like you are better than other people. I think the poster pointed something out that few of us knew. Besides, with all lawsuits by copyright and trademark holders trying to claim more they are entitled to, this is a perfectly valid thing to ponder, especially when considering who owns the trademark.

Is this a discussion or an Eminem ego standoff for geeks? You do understand how civilized discussions work, don't you?

Re:Trademark...

[ortholattice]

With an obviously invented name like "Locutus"...

It is a Latin word. I believe "locutus" is the perfect participle of the Latin loqui ("to speak"), so it would mean "having spoken". So for the Star Trek character, it is suggests a spokesman for the Borg. For the "Locutus" software product, which I don't think is a "a toy, action figure, poseable figure or a doll," it might be suggestive of a source of information.

Re:Trademark...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it's my baby's mamma's drama. . .

Re:Trademark...

[LMariachi]

The way I understand it, as with copyright, a trademark need not be registered to be protected.

Then you don't understand it.

With an obviously invented name like "Locutus"...

As another poster pointed out, this "obviously invented" word was invented by the ancient Romans.

Re:Trademark...

[MyHair]

On the other hand, this is the guy who named his anonymous P2P network "Freenet" when that name has been used for many other things.

I don't know if he intentionally uses well-used names, but it sure can be a pain to search for Freenet info because free ISPs keep popping up. I expect Locutus will turn up a bunch of Star Trek fan sites.

Re:Trademark...

[SeanAhern]

(BTW, why does Slashdot not allow tags but allow text-only postings and the obvious <tt>...<br> thing? What a pain.)

The <ecode> tag is your friend:

typedef struct
{
position_t position;
color_t color;
int index;
bool_t in_play;
} bishop_t;

That was written as:

<ecode>
typedef struct
...
</ecode>

See the relevant section of the FAQ.

Re:Trademark...

[po8]

Thanks!

Re:wrong icon

[ubugly2]

you should notice that the icon for microsoft is bill gates as a borg,that is what i was refering to..

.NET paragraph

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people will cutnpaste this paragraph?

The application is only 400k in size, but many users will notice that the download is over 20MB. This is because Locutus relies on Microsoft's .NET framework, and if a user doesn't have .NET they will automatically download a version of the installer that does.

P2P for Linux...

[Doomrat]

When are they going to release a good P2P program for Linux? Not that gnutella crud, I'm talking about something like KaZaA that even people stuck on 56K can use well. I'm fed up with wine & KaZaA lite dying every 5 seconds.

Re:P2P for Linux...

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't Kazaa based on Gift? There is a Gift client/server package availble for Linux. Search for gift-curs.

Re:P2P for Linux...

[jonathan_ingram]

No. When giFT first started out, it was trying to be compatible with KaZaA. However, almost immediately afterwards, KaZaA changed their protocol to make it highly difficult to use (I don't believe anyone has reverse engineered the current KaZaA protocol), so giFT uses its own p2p network protocol called openFT.

Re:P2P for Linux...

[Zaffle]

There are a few P2P clients. Most, IMHO aren't that great. However my ISP traffic shapes most of the P2P networks, so don't take my opinion too much to heart.

There are a few gnutella clients (qtella springs to mind).

There is also giFT. giFT use to access the KaZaA network, however they went and changed everything, so now giFT accesses their own OpenFT network. Theoretically anyone can write a client to access the openft network, but they strongly urge/require you to use the giFT daemon, which IMHO seems reasonable enough. Clients (eg giFT-curs) connect to the daemon through a simple protocol, and the giFT daemon does the network talking.

The advantages are two-fold. Anyone can write a client in their own pretty GUI style, and not have to worry about poluting the network with bad packets. And two, and this is currently theoretical, the giFT daemon can be moddified to support other P2P networks, so there is no reason why the giFT daemon couldn't, for example, connect to both OpenFT and gnuetlla.

As for bandwidth issues, I'm afraid due to the nature of P2P networks, bandwidth will always be an issue. Networks like napster were ok because they had a central server which coordianted everything, it was also what allowed it to be brought down.

Re:P2P for Linux...

[mliu]

Try one of the Linux clients on the eDonkey network. I prefer eDonkey to Kazaa even when I'm running Windows.

Re:P2P for Linux...

[Xpilot]

I've heard of giFT, but how easy is it to find stuff on that network?

Re:P2P for Linux...

[Doomrat]

It's not so bad. Searches are VERY fast, but due to less users you're less likely to find stuff. It's okay for mainsteam artists.

Re:P2P for Linux...

[rmohr02]

http://dc.ketelhot.de/

Granted, DC is harder to use than KaZaA, but it's better.

Re: P2P for Linux...

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you tried Mutella & mldonkey? They're console and web-based clients for Gnutella & eDonkey.

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[Shippy]

Do five more minutes of work and you'll discover Mono.

Is this a joke?

[ThoreauHD]

Running "secure" proprietary software on a windows box. Where have I heard that before. No man. Put the pipe down and walk away.

These people don't seem to learn.

Not the first p2p with encryption.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the first p2p client with an encryption feature was filetopia.

www.filetopia.com

Re:Not the first p2p with encryption.

[IamTheRealMike]

Actually I could have sworn that FastTrack was the first P2P app with encryption, or even FreeNet. The summary was way off base there.

why another run time, then?

[djupedal]

The point being why do we need another run time, when we already have more than enough. That is a rhetorical question, so don't bother waving the .net flag in my face, thanks.

Re:why another run time, then?

[Graspee_Leemoor]

"The point being why do we need another run time, when we already have more than enough."

Yes, but according to Sun in a really authentic leaked memo their run time, now what was their technical term again? Ah! Sucks.

graspee

Re:why another run time, then?

[ftvcs]

At least sun's works on different platforms, micro$ofts just ... sucks.

Re:why another run time, then?

[Shippy]

I'd rather have something that works on one or two platforms really really well than something like Java that works like shit on all platforms. I can never get consistent behavior from Java programs and they're always so slow. So, really I think Java is what sucks. Have you ever read about or used .NET? Doesn't sound like it. Sounds like you're spouting your useless zealot opinions. I won't bother going into the Mono project, because a person of your ignorance probably wouldn't bother reading about it either.

23Meg memory footprint

[tandr]

... for application that supposed to be in background??? I read it as not only Java has memory footprint problems, but .NET based ones too. :(

Re:23Meg memory footprint

[Sanity]

Please remember that this is a prototype. We are working hard to address issues like this.

Re:23Meg memory footprint

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the memory footprint you tard, it's the .NET download that's 20MB. It doesn't use that much memory. .NET applications are faster and smaller than Java programs. Calm yourself.

Re:23Meg memory footprint

[tandr]

well. I am not complaining that YOUR application is memory hog in particular. I am mostly surprised that after all these talks about memory footprint in Java, .Net shows pretty much the same and no one give a damn.

Good luck with your app, I hope you will avoid Napster's doom.

Fat chance I'll take another look....

[djupedal]

Download...click

"You appear to be using Windows NT 4 without .Net. Unfortunately we do not support Windows NT 4 at this time, although we are working hard to expand the range of supported Operating Systems"

.net, eh? Swell...and I was so encouraged to see the site using PHP.

.NET? Secure?

[blumpy]

>Locutus differs from most other P2P networks on several levels, most prominently its focus on security....The application is only 400k in size, but many users will notice that the download is over 20MB. This is because Locutus relies on Microsoft's .NET framework, and if a user doesn't have .NET they will automatically download a version of the installer that does.

Hmm... focus on security, yet uses .NET? I don't understand....

automatic? Not in this case. What a waste of time

[djupedal]

"You appear to be using Windows NT 4 without .Net. Unfortunately we do not support Windows NT 4 at this time, although we are working hard to expand the range of supported Operating Systems."

Why not work hard to support an operating system with a future...anything but Windows.

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[tulare]

Yes, I've done that five minutes of work. Well, maybe more. Maybe a lot more. I personally think Miguel is on to something truly wonderful with the project. But thanks for offering your help.

My point was this: as written, locutus is a pure Windows-only app, which was not in any way apparent from the original posting. And, according to the faq, the developers of locutus do not intend to release the source for the app, which means no porting to Mono, lisp, Applescript, FORTRAN, or anything else for that matter. Only for Windows.

While I have no objection to people wanting to develop for any platform they want to, it's always been my impression that /. is not primarily geared toward Windows developers. There are plenty of those. All I'm saying is, it'd be nice if Michael, or anyone else posting, would at least mention something to the effect to "this app won't run unless you have windows." In the context, I don't think it's too much to ask.

MOD PARENT UP

[Anonymous Coward]

As funny! I did laugh when I read it. Exactly what I was thinking. But then again, look who put the article up. Michael? Uh-oh!

Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a much nicer way to say what I wrote here.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

And see how much more effective it is?

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

NO.

What, exactly, would be indicative of it's effectiveness? Mod points??? LOL

happy is as happy does

[djupedal]

Teach in College? You mean practices like not re-inventing the wheel? We have enough runtimes on hand now. Loading something from MS seems to only please the MS faithful. Windows software on Windows? You mean like Ford gasoline in a Ford Car? Or GE electricity surging into a GE microwave? Or... Your decry is hardly objective. Save me the cup of kool aid...

First one's free....

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny cigarettes for you little boys...funny pills for you little girls...and funny little photos for all of us together...come on, the first one's free....

freenet?

[Valpis]

And if compared to freenet, any benefits?

Re:freenet?

[Jhan]

Well, you can search. And files won't disappear from the network unless reuploaded every day.

Unfortunately, it lacks the real killer feature of FreeNet: routing the actual data through the P2P network just like the queries.

This means the Man can still get you by setting up honeypots. What use is a secure channel if your peer is malicious?

Re:freenet?

[cioxx]

And if compared to freenet, any benefits?

yes. 30% more bloat.

Re:freenet?

[kalidasa]

And if compared to freenet, any benefits?

Read the FAQ.

so, there's a new soundbite

[djupedal]

...not be an open-source app... = Windows only. ...duh...

open: good
closed: bad

Flamebait? Mods, take a breath before knee jerks.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I were trying to flame, I'd have been more effective. I was just mentioning for those interested that this is not an open source app, and will not run on an open source operating system.

Spoiler [redundant]

[djupedal]

Windows only...and requires .net - now tell us again why it didn't use the MS Borg icon? Seems more like it at least deserved the kneepads icon.

Re:Spoiler [redundant]

[Ziviyr]

And its named Locutus for crying out loud!

!!BORG!!

Re:Spoiler [redundant]

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a kneepads icon?

Oh My God! This is so cool...

[MoThugz]

it's like shared folders on a windows network... but get this... it's *encrypted*!!! Therefore making it suitable for me to use in my Department of Homeland Security office... Cool huh?

Furthermore, it uses *encryption*... meaning it is illegal for export outside the great US of A... thus those bad terrorists can't get it... naaa... naaa... naaa... naaa... naaaaaaaa!

PGP is not new for P2P...

[torpor]

... dibs, for example, uses it:

http://freshmeat.net/projects/dibs/

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[Anonymous Coward]

Learn how to use your goddamn apostrophe's!

My goddamn apostrophe's what? ;)

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[umofomia]

My point was this: as written, locutus is a pure Windows-only app, which was not in any way apparent from the original posting. And, according to the faq [locut.us], the developers of locutus do not intend to release the source for the app, which means no porting to Mono, lisp, Applescript, FORTRAN, or anything else for that matter. Only for Windows.

According to the FAQ:

3.1 What is .Net and why does Locutus need it?
.Net is, at its core, an attempt to standardize the way that software applications communicate with the underlying Operating System. .Net was developed by Microsoft, and at the time of writing is only available for Windows, however .Net has been embraced by some in the Linux community who are working on Open Source versions of .Net such as Mono. Once finished, these will allow Locutus to run on non-Microsoft operating systems.

You don't need the source to port Locutus to Mono... it's compiled to the .NET Common Language Runtime, which Mono is attempting the implement for Linux. So all you need is the compiled program; the source is not necessary... similar to the way Java apps run on top of JVMs running on different platforms.

Wrong

[Sanity]

Think about it - how much time do most information workers spend looking for information? Some estimate about two hours per day, and over 80% of information in the Enterprise is located on user's hard disks - not on web or ftp sites.

This is the market Locutus is going after.

Re:Wrong

[deviator]

I'm a bit skeptical about this--users on a corporate network shouldn't store anything important locally, ever. Using something like Locutus to remedy this is simply using a technical band-aid to solve a training/culture problem.

Re:Wrong

[pod]

They're not supposed to, but they do, deal with it. They do it for various reasons.

The default save location for many apps is the local Documents & Settings folder. Try teaching people who have no concept of a directory tree to find their network drive.
Local disk is quicker.
There is no disk quota.
It's always available.
It's indexed by local Index Server.

Re:Wrong

[blincoln]

The default save location for many apps is the local Documents & Settings folder.

...which can be remapped by systems administrators to a location on a server...

Re:Wrong

[deviator]

Any CIO worth his salt would make sure this is communicated as a "no-no" to the users. 1) Documents & settings can be changed with a registry entry (w/ a .reg file delivered via login script, Group Policy (ADS) or ZENworks, for instance) 2) File servers should be fast enough that most users won't know the difference. 3) Quotas shouldn't be a problem if acceptable use & purge policies are standardized. 4) File servers (like filing cabinets) should _always_ be available during normal business hours, at least to desktop machines. Offline Folders (or better yet, Novell's iFolder) can be employed for persistent access to data while on the road. 5) Centralized corporate "search engine." Again, this is really a technological "band-aid" with some serious security implications to a problem that should be resolved with proper procedures issued from the top down. A simple one page "how and where to save your data, and why" document issued to all users would negate the need for this. (And needless to say, a corporate structure should already have Group Policies/ZENworks in place for desktop management & some mechanism for disconnected local data access-- like iFolder). Your post sounds like you're making an excuse for badly managed networks.

Re:Wrong

[pod]

Your post sounds like you're making an excuse for badly managed networks.

Yes, in a perfect world none of those would be issues. Unfortunatelly, it's rare to see a well designed and implemented Windows office network of a non-trivial size.

...and this modified tag line

[djupedal]

"...those interested in trying the preview, (windows only... .net required) can download it here."

Bah, it doesnt run on linux.

[miffo.swe]

What use is it when it doesnt run on anything but windows? Many scientists run linux and other stuff nowadays so its pretty insane doing a client that doesnt run on anything but windows.

I detest using anything that isnt cross platform friendly. When the next OS comes i dont want to stand there with my corporate pants down.

Why is it so hard making applications truly cross plattform? Technology?

You already know the answer, the removal of the applications barrier is the biggest threat to Microsoft today. .net is an effort at keeping that barrier onto the future. I say good luck to Miguel when MS dicides it has enough desciples to boot on .net.

Re:Bah, it doesnt run on linux.

[SealBeater]

From the FAQ:

3.2 I am a Linux/Mac user, is there is version of Locutus for me? .Net was developed by Microsoft, and at the time of writing is only available for Windows, however .Net has been embraced by some in the Linux community who are working on Open Source versions of .Net such as Mono. Once finished, these will allow Locutus to run on non-Microsoft operating systems (we are Linux geeks too - so we won't waste any time once Mono comes of age).

Re:Bah, it doesnt run on linux.

[miffo.swe]

Well my belief is that MS lets Miquel have his fun until enough userbase is established on windows and then just screw him over so bad he wont sit for a year. Mono is not something i support because it is controlled by MS wich spells bad considering how well previous teaming with them have been for others. They have a bad habit of screwing every partner over and i cant imagine why they would stop at Mono, do you?

Until MS goes out and develops their own linux client i think they are just happy that someone is working for them for free getting them some good PR to the cross platform pitch (wich i think is bs la grande). When thats over, boot!

Re:Bah, it doesnt run on linux.

[Anonymous Coward]

I detest using anything that isnt cross platform friendly. When the next OS comes i dont want to stand there with my corporate pants down.

.NET will be multi-platform, as soon as MS (or the Mono project) writes other VM's to run the .NET bytecode.

Re:Bah, it doesnt run on linux.

[SealBeater]

I absolutely agree with you, I don't support Mono either.

SealBeater

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[tulare]

Thank you for the first intelligent answer to the issues I had with the app. In a very short reply, you have managed to cut through my own ignorance without trolling or otherwise adding emotion to a technical debate. Put the way you put it, it makes sense. I'll drop the .Net beef now :)

Hahahaha..

[Anonymous Coward]

Ian is clueless.

Merge PGP with Gnutella clone, add the dotnet bloat, assign trust levels and you got yourself a "revolutionary tool" that might change the way people do stuff *cough*

In 2 days a project will appear on sourceforge that will be a) GPL b) More Robust c) More added features d) FREE.

It's been proven time and time again. Don't people ever learn?

Re:Hahahaha..

[klevin]

The problem with that is Ian hasn't released source or algorithms. So whoever wants to do a GPL clone will either have to reverse engineer the search and connection code, or develop their own algorithms that perform just as well. There've been losts of very smart people trying to develop P2P systems that are faster and more robust than the current crop; we're still waiting.

I'd be glad to see a GPL version, especially one that's not encumbered by a runtime system controlled by Microsoft.

As RMS (or was it Linus) pointed out, part of the power of Free software is to lower the price that can be charged for software "products." Where there's powerful, robust, Free competition, proprietary vendors can't rely only on the high prices of competitors to keep their profit margins up.

Re:Hahahaha..

[tftp]

So whoever wants to do a GPL clone will either have to reverse engineer the search and connection code, or develop their own algorithms that perform just as well.

Who chases who will depend on market penetration, and a GPLed client will win even if it not as efficient as the closed source competition. After all, the problem here is quite simple, and GPLed client can be based on any number of established protocols and codebases. It's the proprietary code that can't do that!

Re:Hahahaha..

[Anonymous Coward]

Freenet's protocol is scalable, unlike Gnutella.

I don't know why he's using .net for his implemenntation though - seems deeply stupid.

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[dalangalma]

To be fair, the tagline for Slashdot is "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.", not "News about Linux, Stuff that's anti-Microsoft."

Trademark Whining....next on Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

When Paramoount get round to "cease and desisting" Ian, we will have the inevitable whining here, just as with Killustrator and all the other projects from developers to ignorant to create unique names for important work.

These developers can all make secure passwords from a command line, but they cant make up a name for a software project.

Its plain and simple stupidity.

Frickin' newbie...

[torpor]

I for one am extremely happy with the .NET framework. It is a comprehensive box of functionality that all .NET applications can make use of. Many useful applications I've written in .NET have been under 200K in size. Comparable programs I've written in Linux are all over 200K in size.

If your app needs a 20 meg framework to just run, then your installed app size would be 20megs + 200k in size.

What is it with programmers these days...

C programmer since '81, and still going strong ... And I know how to calculate my binary size, thanks very much.

Re:Frickin' newbie...

[Anonymous Coward]

The .NET runtime, unlike the Java runtime, will not have any problem becoming commonplace across Microsoft's own OS. Since I already had the runtime (gasp!), his program would be 200k for me to download. What a shock, that!

You'd think if you've been developing software since '81, you could tell the difference between the binary image of a program, and the library components it relies on to function. Otherwise I'll have to start including the entire fucking OS into the size of my web client's size for comparison on teh Slashdot.

Re:Frickin' newbie...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the concept of a shared library too hard for you to understand? You don't have to install a separate .NET framework for each application on your machine, so those 20MB don't count towards the size of each application you write.

What is it with idiots these days...

Re:Frickin' newbie...

[torpor]

Of course I can tell the difference between binary image and library. Seems you can't tell the difference between irony and hypocracy, though.

The .NET runtime, unlike the Java runtime, will not have any problem becoming commonplace across Microsoft's own OS.

You honestly think, though, that .NET is going to be *so* static (in the movement sense, not linking) that you won't have to upgrade .NET along with all your other new fancy .NET apps floating around?

Oh, wait, MS do that for you automagically, so it doesn't count...

Re:Frickin' newbie...

[Anonymous Coward]

yes, except upgrades are not the whole 20MB over again. I upgraded to .NET SP2 today and the whole upgrade was probably under a megabyte. When was the last time you were able to upgrade the JRE without having to download the whole thing over again.

Re:Frickin' newbie...

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you retarded or something? .NET has versioning, it can change all it wants and
1. It doesn't break shit
2. It doesn't require you to download monolithic snapshots of the entire system

You sure are an ignorant fuck for someone that claims to have been programming for 22 years.

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you know what irony is, Baldrick?

The name Locutus

[Anonymous Coward]

Back in the early 80's punk rock seen in NY I was a "regular" at way to many concert and clubs and was known as Locutus by a lot of people including several departed members of Kiss. When I saw the borg Picard on Star Trek take my name I was honestly hurt. Now a P2P app? Can I sue or have I simply fried to many brain cells?

Why would businesses take this up?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't see any compelling reason why a business would take this up. As others have pointed out, http, ftp, PGP and email pretty much cover what this service provides (from a business perspective), so what's the point of the Enterprise Edition (pretty sure that was the name of it, should've left the page open...).

Alternately, is there some compelling LEGAL reason why they'd offer a "business version" when their product doesn't look that different from - how to put this? - "legally questionable" products such as Kazaa? Given the recent Sharman ruling, is offering a "business version" of Locutus expected to cover their arses from a legal perspective? If so, how?

Re:You know what?

[hdparm]

(Score:2, Informative&Insigthful). No need to read the article. Thank you.

Re:You know what?

[KDan]

With the Mono effort, .NET will be supported under linux too - and I'm willing to bet my hat that the linux support will be better and more stable than the windows support. If that's not a blow to M$ I don't know what is :-)

Daniel

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[Anonymous Coward]

Mono is not, and will not in the near future, support enough of .NET to run this program. To suggest that it should be used makes about as much sense and saying "run it in wine." Neither are functional enough to bother with, and the time when WinForms will actually work in Mono, Hell will freeze over and form icebergs in Australia.

Next Debian releast

[benja]

Will we look back at these stories in a couple of years and think the same way about them as we now do with stories about 'Java applications storming the desktop', 'Push applications redefining the way we work on the net', or 'Debian releases new version before 2025'?

To be precise here, the next Debian release is now scheduled for 2038; elected Debian officials said it is going to be an important maintenance release that cannot be delayed further after this date.

Do that and you're dead...

[RMH101]

On The Register today, talking about Ashcroft's new PATRIOT extensions:

The new law against "Unlawful use of encryption" would establish prison terms for anyone who "knowingly and willfully uses encryption technology to conceal any incriminating communication" relating to a federal crime that they're committing, or attempting to commit. Offenders would face up to ten years in prison, in addition to the jail time the underlying crime carries, if any. A Justice Department analysis included with the proposal suggests that the illegal encrypting carry a mandatory minimum term of five years in prison.

On the news everywhere in a few months: Guatanemo Bay camp X-Ray expanded to house an estimated 600,000 p2p users from across the world, guarded by armed RIAA security.

Re:Do that and you're dead...

[cra]

I'm not planning to do that at all. :-) I like having legal copies of the movies, although I have occationally watched pirate versions of new movies, they are rarely of good enough quality to compete with originals. The only advantage is that the pirate versions get out before the movies are released on DVD. For practical reasons I don't go to the movies anyway, so the way I see it, the movie companies don't loose any money on me if I see a pirate version. On the contrary, I buy the movies I like anyway.

And hey, that law you are talking about; we don't have that in my country. . .

Re:Do that and you're dead...

[RMH101]

No, you might not have it in your country. But what happens if you're peering with a US person? IANAL etc but it would seem it would could be used to make you Very Unhappy...

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[Anonymous Coward]

The irony is in even remotely comparing that extremely lame .sig joke to Blackadder. Or even calling it "irony". It's about as ironic as Alanis Morissette.

Re:Great. Five whole minutes of my life wasted.

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fairer, the tagline has only ever been half-right.

copyright violation + encryption == 10 years ?

[zcat_NZ]

Joy oh joy..

Under the new "PATRIOT II" legislation, using encryption while comitting a crime will result in a prison sentence of 5 to 10 years. They don't mention if it has to be a 'serious' crime, so I guess copyright violation qualifies.

This could get interesting.

Re:copyright violation + encryption == 10 years ?

[TheRealStyro]

Hmm, using encryption while comitting a crime is an even bigger crime. But how would they know you are comitting a crime unless they violated the DMCA (you are using encryted communications).

I guess if this administration isn't against removing rights of the 'free' citizenry, they also are not above making themselves exempt from procecution.

Groove

[rbeattie]

150+ posts and no one's mentioned Groove? Do you people live in a frigin' vacuum?

Groove is a company founded by Ray Ozzie, the creator of Lotus Notes. The Groove Workspace is a hyper-secure P2P application made for business and government use. It has several "tools" that you can use within the application like chat, file-sharing, calendaring, custom forms, etc. All communication between the P2P clients is encrypted as well as the files themselves. Once you import a file into Groove to be shared, it's encrypted automatically.

The general theory behind the application is that you can't rely on the wires to be secure, ever. So all the data and communication between peers is encrypted automatically without any user intervention needed.

The reason you should think this app is cool is because it's an easy way to set up super-secure filesharing between peers whether on a local network or across the internet. It's not open file sharing like Gnutella, but it's more like having a virtual secure file server just for you and the peers you invite into your workspace.

The reason you should hate this app is because not only is Groove in bed with Microsoft (M$ has invested millions and only runs on Windows) but this app is also being used by the new Office of Information Awareness, i.e. Big Brother.

-Russ

Re:Groove

[Anonymous Coward]

We use groove extensively for secure file transfer and file sharing between china, hong kong, and the US. Never had problems with it, and even relatively unskilled users are able to get it up and running.

Note that there is a preview edition available free for personal use. Some limitations (not on features, but on number of shared environments).

What port's does this use?

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm behind a router and need to forward ports, does anyone know what ports i need to forward?

Not necessarily

[Anonymous Coward]

Recall that Clarke did grow up in the Republic of Ireland, where they still have to learn Latin in many schools.

Re:Not necessarily

[andrewscraig]

Yes, but I went to school with him, and I know that we didn't have to learn latin there! He went here

Re:automatic? Not in this case. What a waste of ti

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not work hard to support an operating system with a future...anything but Windows.

That's why they released it on Windows. They wanted the app to actually be used by a large amount of people, not the 1% of the OS market that regualarly whines about not having apps on slashdot. If the OS was really skyrocketing and cutting into the share of MS Windows, then it would have appeared first on Linux. obviously its not, so you have been fooled by the slashdot fud.

20 MB + MSIE...

[wossName]

...if you're using Windows 98, because .NET need MSIE 5.01 or higher, and my copy of Win98SE came with MSIE 5.00.

I tried it, its unusuable

[Anonymous Coward]

Firstly, Groove is about collaboratively creating documents, Locutus is about sharing them once they have been created - so this is an apples and oranges comparision.

Having said that, last week my co-workers and I tried to use Groove to collaboratively work on some MS Word documents. It was an absolute mess. In theory, you could watch others edit a document, and request permission to edit it yourself when you needed to, sounds great - the problem? In reality, it barely worked, and wasted hours of our time. Groove is over-ambitious, it tries to be too many things, and ends up being good at none of them.

Microsoft should have found somewhere more appropriate to invest their $51MM.

Re:Thank you, Master Of The Obvious Joke.

[Anonymous Coward]

But it was the first joke.

+5 Insightful? You must be kidding!

[Sanity]

Whoever posted this comment clearly didn't visit either of the links in the article, whoever modded this up should be ashamed of themselves.

It shall be left as an exercise for the reader (who can actually be bothered to follow hyperlinks) to see why.

.Net? No thanks

[kien]

The application is only 400k in size, but many users will notice that the download is over 20MB. This is because Locutus relies on Microsoft's .NET framework...

Thanks anyway, Ian. If you could disembowel the bloated .NET (.NOT?) framework dependency, you would find a much warmer reception here.

--K.

Re:.NET? Secure?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you obviously don't understand anything about .NET

Encrypted P2P ...

[nirnaeth]

Has been around for a while now. Ceck out filetopia. Although Locutus does look useful for searching corporate lans and such.

release date?

[mschoolbus]

So... He just released the 0.3 preview now and it is due to be released in March...? Sounds like maybe he should have dedicated a bit more time for this, for making a decent product with loads of testing.

Re:.Net? No thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, where have you been? Slashdot's stats clearly show that Windows users are the overwhelming majority. You think Microsoft is putting VS.Net ads on Slashdot for their health?

Locutus Preview Released

[Anonymous Coward]

You cannot download the preview without having
Micro$' ".net" installed and running...AND without
using Micro$' 'internet explorer'. This is a
prescription for gathering evidence for the RIAA!
You have to have the ultimate 'borg' spyware in
your machine in order to use it, then you make sure that the files that you send are court
provable to be traceable absolutely to you with
the finger of prosecution guided by the PGP
signature that only you are legally defined to have.
In this case, resistance would be futile!

My opinion: no thanks

[afabbro]

If someone was trying to sell me Locutus, I'd say "no thanks". It attempts to use technology to solve what is essentially a workflow issue.

The problem is not new - everyone keeps their work on their PC instead of using the central storage. Or if they use the central storatge, they keep it in their home directory. Locutus would just enable and promote this behavior.

If the data is on a workstation, admins can't back it up (or at least, shouldn't be backing it up - that's not workstations are for in most environments). They can't manage it, it's not version-controlled, it's not indexed, others can't use it, etc.

People who need Locutus need either a better technical architecture or better management.

Re:My opinion: no thanks

[forkboy]

If you share large amounts of data with people outside your organization, though, it shows its usefulness more. Maybe you don't want your vendors or partners having access to your corporate LAN, but the data changes so often that putting it on the web is not an option. Maybe you have really really dumb users or vendors who don't know how to use FTP.

You can still centralize the documents (as well your should) but now that file server has a secure, encrypted way to share them with people both within and outside of the organization. (of course this qould require putting the server in arm's reach of the internet with open ports, so you're hoping they did proper testing and debugging of Locutus so yer ass dont get hax0red.)

FreeNet Author

[charnov]

Anyone point out that this is the same guy that started FreeNet?

Locutus is a good idea and it is very fast. I use it as a replacement for the find file tool in windows. Locutus built its index MUCH quicker and searches are almost instantaneous.

This line is frightening...

[fudgefactor7]

"In Locutus Prototype this is somewhat involved so please bear with us - it will be much easier in Locutus Lite (which will use UPNP to automatically configure your NAT)."

Yeah, like anyone trusts UPNP... Additionally, how would it "automatically" configure my hardware firewall? It can't. This clearly assumes a software situation (most likely scenario, I'll give you, but still.) Better off, it should have just said "open these ports..."

On top of that, this line isn't encouraging "We have a strong committment to supporting diverse operating systems with Locutus, however at the time of writing .NET is only available for Windows."

*plonk*

[metamatic]

In other words: We hope to encourage adoption of .NET using our application.

No, thanks.

Sheesh, who'd've thought Ian Clarke would be a Microsoft whore?

Encryption isn't the big deal.

[TheRealFoxFire]

While the encryption aspect of Locutus is interesting, the real achievement in Locutus is its searching algorithm, which, like Freenet, scales logarithmically. Freenet, as you know, cannot yet be searched in the same manner (keyword boolean searches).

Contrast this with other P2P networks with searching, all of which rely on either broadcast or superpeer mitigated broadcast searching, which are either difficult to scale (Gnutella), or vulnerable to attacks on the superpeers (Kazaa and friends).

Must be a felony

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure that I read that PATRIOT II introduces new felony offences for encryption used in committing a felony.

Corporate Espionage Has a New Tool

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the corporations that the enterprise edition is intended for will stomp on this very quickly-the potential for losing in-house R&D to anybody on the network because some non-tech-savvy peon had made their entire hard drive would be a major concern.

Bullshit

[thelexx]

You have chosen to download Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition 1.4.1_01

* Download j2re-1_4_1_01-windows-i586.exe .
Filesize = 8,015,928 bytes.

It's less than half the size of the .net 'runtime'. And what if I decide I don't want .net on my machine anymore? The others you mention are all add-ons that don't try to become a permanent part of your OS. On my box at work I installed VisStudio.NET to check it out some time ago. It tells me I have to run the setup.exe and then throws a fatal error when clicking 'Remove' under Add/Remove Software. Something tells me that even running setup.exe once I track down the CD, won't _completely_ remove it.

"The only difference is this is Microsoft, so you're quick to bash them because you're an ignorant asshole."

I have MANY MANY reasons to bash MS, and none of them stem from ignorance, asshole. FOAD.

Did someone confuse...

[MarvinMouse]

P2P with PGP...

I mean, like I could see in a corporate fax how 2 looks like G, but really... ;-)

Politically Correct Dogma

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's give up the religious dogma, emotional outbursts and reactivity, and evaluate it objectively. Objective evaluation of a complete situation is what they really tried to teach you in college.

No, actually what they teach in college is politically correct evaluation of any situation, even if all the facts are against it. Just try to debate racial questions with any college educated liberal -- their reaction is purely emotional, not logical. This is because the entire `White guilt' ideology rests upon emotional reactions, not scientific or historical facts.

My take

[DarkHand]

The RIAA is trying to say that p2p clients like Kazaa have no legitimate use; only illegal ones. The whole 'corporate file sharing' hoopla Locutus is trying to pass off is to start off right away with a seemingly legitimate use, so the whole thing can't be shut down just because people share music or software. The only thing that worries me is this quote from their FAQ: "Locutus uses a centralized database to inform Locutus nodes about each-other." If they do come under legal fire, its possible to shut the whole network down, ala Napster. This turned me off to the network right away.

I presume this is a winbloz only app?

[pair-a-noyd]

I went to the site and saw no mention of Linux and the D/L is a 20meg .exe file. I can only assume it's NOT for consumption by alternative crowd.

Clickwrap felony

[xixax]

Locutus does look nifty though in that the files can be shared encrypted..

So by using this app to trade some music with 10 people you can go straight to jail. Wow, that really is one-click convenience.

Xix.

YHL

[Mdog]

Slashdot is in disarray. The moderators are constantly pulling off facist bullshit. The moderators mostly know that. Hence, I have a 5 on my post.

HAND.