Slashdot Mirror
Fracturing P2P Networks
A reader writes: "If you run Freenet and have noticed that you practically can't access anything on the network, you are not alone; a group of Freenet users has organized a Freenet Revolt by forming a separate network running an old, proven build of Freenet, and things have been heating up on the freenet-devel mailing list with a scary declaration by project leader Ian Clarke that Freenet is a research project and has always been, which scared some list members, since Freenet has been actively promoted as a production network and has a sensitive userbase, including Chinese dissidents. Some people are already moving to similar networks like GNUnet and Entropy. " Of course, that does sound different then what has been said before.
does someone seriously believe Freenet is just a research project when it has such social ramifications?
In a couple of decades' time, when everything, such as phone, radio, television, movies, music, books, the lot, are locked up through DRM/Palladium, something like Freenet would be the anemia (sp?) of the command-and-control society companies are pushing us towards. It may well be illegal some time in the future.
Hmm, FreeNet2 ?
Didn't EFNet do this a few years ago?
Welcome to the End
If Ian Clarke claims it is anything but research, then people will start to see it in a whole new light, perhaps claiming Ian (and other developers) be held resposible for its use.
Maybe he just seeks to avoid those conflicts?
My <1000 UID is with a hot chick
Anyone find anything of interest in FreeNet? It was too slow for casual browsing, at least...
Apparently, it is easier to find all kinds of "interesting" stuff (mostly entertaining documents by crackpots) in run-of-the-mill p2p networks, such as DC. And all the feds looking for child porn distributors would do well to take a look at edonkey2000 network. DC is self-censoring, i.e. child/gay porn sharers aer kicked away from the hubs.
It's funny to see how hysterical people are about child porn, and how "underground" it is portrayed in the media. But yet relatively public networks such as edonkey has lots of the "pre-teen" material. It's not like it would take a heroic detective skills to raid some of the houses of people who are distributing it...
A standard problem with deploying systems is that as soon as there is a critical mass of users, the bulk of them want stability rather than innovation.
The solution is to have multiple parallel versions, one for the early adopters, one for the mass market, and one for the late adopters.
If this is not possible within Freenet itself (because the network exists as a single entity) then the solution is to have alternative products. It seems quite fair to have (e.g. Gnunet) providing a robust and stable product while Freenet continues to act as a research project: both needs are clear and there is no real need to compromise either of them.
Eventually the question of how to build such networks will be fully understood and the research will end and everyone will migrate to the One Network that does it best.
Until then, yay, more Freenet, and more choice!
Ceci n'est pas une signature
Perhaps if it were anything other than a research project, Mr Clarke might be classified as a terrorist.
If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
How long before someone makes a client to merge the two transparently to the user?
I'm not sure he can, but it is very easy:
A dissident is someone who disagree with someone you disagree with and a terrorist is someone disagreeing with you. In the same way, a freedomfighter is someone fighting an oppresive regime you don't like, while a rebel is someone fighting an oppresive regime you do like.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
If a personality or split of vision occurs, just fork the codebase.
It's open source right? Whatever will be, will be.
# What is Freenet?
Freenet is free software designed to provide a forum where information can be published and consumed without fear of censorship. It does this by providing a completely decentralized, and robust way that people can publish and read information anonymously. Freenet grew out of a paper I wrote while still a student at Edinburgh University.
Sounds like the canary has changed its tune, eh? Now freenet is a research project, not a 'forum where information can be published and consumed without fear of censorship.' Although I always respect a developer that wants to go back and fix bugs with a system before moving to another release (or I suppose in this case, after moving to another release), the email from Ian Clarke sounds downright aggorant -- you can address points about bugs without telling someone to go use another network. I don't use freenet, so it doesn't really affect me, but I definately feel sorry for those who do/did.
Ian Clarke is just saying that Freenet is imperfect, and some people are overreacting to what he said. Freenet is not about to start divulging anybody's anonyminity anytime soon. Actually the "research" is looking into continually better ways of protecting it. Freenet still has a long way to go, and creating some sort of pseudo-"stable" branch is not going to help things. Ian Clarke was talking about the bugs found in all software programs, not actual design failures. Of course, perfect security is a pipe dream, and those people who are throwing this tantrum can stop asking for it.
How many nefarious uses of the Internet are defended by pointing out how dissidents need to make use of them to save the whales or whatever. I think that whole argument is a giant red herring.
It's easy, really.
Dissidents are people with an opinion that differs enough from popular opinion to attract negative attention from state officials, while terrorists are people who try to accomplish their goals by killing civilians on purpose.
Does that clear things up for you?
Of course, the word dissident is only used by people who agree with said opinion, and the word terrorist by those who disagree with said goals.
Better comparisions would be freedom fighter/terrorist, dissident/fundamentalist, and education/propaganda
Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
Why are you lumping gay porn in with child porn? Is the only acceptable porn that depicting women, or heterosexual couples?
Just curious.
I like this comment:
It is estiamted that, after digging a 100 ft well, it is possible to achieve over six kilobits of extra RAM storage at 20 kHz.
We are currently looking for distributors.
Data storage in a well!
Seriously, though, I've been thinking that something like this is the solution to the real-world problem of permanent storage. CDs die. Tapes (or their hardware) die. Harddrives die. The only way to maintain permanent storage over _long_ periods of time is to think of it like drops in an ocean: data forever moving. The net will live forever.
We need a p2p network for secure, private file storage, not sharing. Anybody know of such a project? I don't think it's freenet, nor is it kazaa. Is this a new p2p idea? Data always flowing, noone knowing what's there. Just have everyone pay N MB to store one MB of private data, then the data can be N (-1?) fold secure.
Who?
You can subscribe here, my darling little boy.
Ive been using freenet for quite a long time. And have, in the past hyped it up and distributed CDs of it and related software to people. As it stands at the moment I will not use freenet until it improves drastically. The latest builts wont retrive anything, even the common link pages. Last time i checked most site maintainers had abandened their site because the network was so sucky. Ian Clark seems to be one of the worst freenet developers. His conserns over the type of material beening distibuted seem to be one of the many reasons freenet development is not progressing as well as it should. I only hope freenet will continue and grow into something to be proud of. We all need this kind of network, if not now, in the future.
I'm sorry, but this guy isn't being paid for his project, made all of his source open, and worked his ass off on something the community uses.
He doesn't "owe" anyone anything, and we should all be thankful that (and this is the main advantage with open source) a project isn't dead just because it's creator is tired of maintaining it.
Instead of complaining about it, branch the code! Make it better! Or at least make it into whatever you want. You see, that's the beauty of open source, instead of "shit, or get off the pot" it's "code or STFU".
Well then, you seem to be an idiot not to realize that most of the offtopic comments and obvious troll comments are moderated by the editors, and not by the users. They have infinite mod points, so, sorry, nobody's wasting their mod points on you, jackass.
Real vs. Theoretical:
Use Freenet vs. Use Something Else:
Production vs. Development:
I didn't find any direct conflicts in the articles linked above, but there's certainly a shift in tone. It's also worth mentioning that they have a release called "stable", in addition to the "development" and "unstable" branches.
What does god have to do with my sexlife, you pervert?
but he didn't have to be snide about it. Next time Mr. Clarke should take a few deep breaths before he responds; otherwise he really comes off sounding obnoxious.
Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter...however, I think your website is broken.
Funny how the RIAA and friends can move heaven and earth in an attempt to get info on people trading bad music on P2P networks, and yet nobody can do same to cut down on kiddie porn. Where the fuck are the priorities???
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
I don't think that's true. I went to cnn.com and foxnews.com and looked up recent stories about U.S. soldiers under attack in post-war Iraq. In the CNN story they call the attackers "gunmen." In the Fox News report they call them "ex-soldiers," and also mention "dissidents" who were protesting and throwing rocks. I think the media is using the correct words.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Of course they are...a bunch of unbathen geeks downloading pr0n. What did you expect?
[Laugh, that was funny]
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
Dissidents are people with an opinion that differs enough from popular opinion to attract negative attention from state officials, while terrorists are people who try to accomplish their goals by killing civilians on purpose.
I think your definitions need work.
Note to moderators: this is not flamebait. Do some research.
Some intelligence agencies have got to Ian, and coerced him into making Freenet unusable and deterring people who would insert material beyond the reach of the laws of their country of residence.
Ian's lawyer has warned him that encouraging people to use Freenet could make him personally culpable, and eligible for extradition to any number of countries under the extradition treaties
Ian's time in USA, before, during and after the Sep 11 attacks, have screwed with his head
And maybe while we are at it: the difference between prisoners of war and "detainees".
(Cue music)
.
Ian Clarke, Ian Clarke, riding through the land. .
"Blimey, this redistribution of free information is trickier than I thought."
Look, you take a few million rugged individualists the try to throw one blanket over them this sort of thing is bound to happen. An acquiantence of mine once complained that they couldn't get people who were Libertarians to register as party members.
Well duh!
Parties aren't part of the Constitutional structure of America. Why would a real Libertarian join one?
The very concept is a bit like the proverbial procrastinators meeting or herd of cats.
This was bound to happen. It's also bound to blow over. Maybe it'll even result in some "genetic annealing" of the net.
KFG
Linux was at version 0.x from 1991 until 1994 when version 1.0 was released. I remember people using Linux 0.x in 1994 though (and 1995, 1996), sometimes in a production capacity, although I'm sure caveats would have recommended against it. In fact, was Linux version 1.0 ready to be used in a production environment with no worries? Not really (I remember my 1.x server getting the "ping of death" and going down, among other things). Freenet was released in 1999. When it goes to version 1.x, that's when I'll expect a more production-oriented p2p network. But Ian does not feel it is ready, and I tend to agree. Linux was very complex, but it did have many other OS's to compare with, it was not totally groundbreaking and revolutionary (although it partly was). Freenet is forging a new path, thus takes more time.
"Foreign terrorists" is a favorite term of U.S. administration officials, used to describe foreigners who have entered Iraq to oppose the occupation. This Reuters report has one example. The term is also frequently used in White House press briefings in the same context.
The key difference between "terrorists" and "troops" (other than the fact that the terrorists are irregular forces) is that the "troops" have an identifiable state associated with them. That means we can attack them in the same way they attack us. Terrorists are mighty inconvenient in terms of conventional warfare. Some might argue that our current foray into Iraq is the result of not having an identifiable state associated with Al Qaida (or however it's spelled today). What's that saying? "If all you've got is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail."
With current technology, there is no need to kill civilians to win wars. Killing the opposing leadership, forces and infrastructure is sufficient.
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
Okay, that's different. Now you're talking about the government calling the attackers terrorists. Before when you said "reports from Iraq," I was under the impression you were talking about the media calling them terrorists. In the Reuters report you sited, the journalists didn't call the attackers terrorists, but they quoted the general who called them "foreign terrorists." The only time the journalist refered to them in his own words, he called them "fighters." I think the media is being pretty even-handed in how they refer to the attackers, although I do think they're putting a magnifing glass on the attacks, and not reporting the positive news out of Iraq.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
It now points to freenet's donation page.
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
To quote Lenin:
Terrorists create terror.
A dissident is somebody with a differing, unpopular political belief.
Vaclav Havel was a dissident. Karl Marx was a dissident.
A terrorist is a person who commits acts intending to terrorise a population into submitting to said terrorists agenda (Note that this is distinctly seperate from war, which is a violent dispute between governments). Osama bin Laden is a Terrorist. Yasser Arafat is a Terrorist, Che Guevara was a Terrorist.
"You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
yes we have server problems for the moment (it's because we use a BSD server who has died!)
feel free to email at opentrolls@free.fr
we'll contact you later when the website is up and running again (on a windows 2003 server!)
He's acting like a stroppy school kid "try earthstation 5" indeed. Somebody stole his Power Puff Girls collection?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
does anyone know why the new freenet build is so buggy? i understand that there were a huge messaging change (use of NIO), but is it buggy just because there was so much code change or because NIO is broken? any information would be appreciated....
smd4985
I had been having headaches to get to Freenet lately. So it was just a technological/ideological problem? For a moment, I thought it was a Coordinated Attack from MPAA, RIAA and Valve Software to stop the distribution of movies, mp3's and HL2 source code.
I was already genuinely worried that I was about to lose my access to my precious very slow bits and Java proggies that hog CPU and memory when they start up! But if it's a technology problem or an ideological one, it can be fixed...
Typically, I'm too tired to do anything until this "proven" software hits APT...
It's just a project leader telling someone to help fix what's broken, wait till it's fixed, or go play somewhere else. Happens all the time, read some Linus Torvalds posts to see how he gives people hell who give him shit. Nothing new here, move on. It's not the end of Freenet.
That's pretty easy, too, Dave.
Check the Geneva Convention. A "prisoner of war" is a legal definition. You have to meet certain criteria in order to be considered an official "prisoner of war," and those criteria are specifically enumerated in the Geneva convention. In general, you have to be a member of, or closely affiliated with, an armed force of a legitamate government. The Al Qaeda fighters are not uniformed, and are not under the command of a governmental authority responsible for their actions. Therefore, they cannot be official prisoners of war, and therefore they do not receive any of the protections afforded by the Geneva convention. Also, it's not like they play by the rules of Geneva convention, anyway.
So then, a "Prisoner of War" is someone who meets the criteria specified by the Geneva convention, and a 'detainee' is somebody captured during military action who does not fit that criteria.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
I am an officer in her majesties armed forces, and am only too aware of the definition of Prisoner of War under the geneva convention...what i dont agree with is the current US interpretation of this. I disagree with you in that i believe these people should be conferred prisoner of war status. What is unacceptable to me and a great deal of my fellow officers and soldiers is that here we have a situation where people are being detained (in my mind illegaly) and with no charges having been brought against them. I have no gripes with america, and count many americans as very good friends...but i think you have a situation in cuba just now in which a future president is going to have a hard time apologising for.
If all you've got is a hammer, and you're being attacked by flies, then don't start looking for nails: get a flyswatter.
OOps - i have read over...and you werent actually disagreeing with any point of view....just clarifying a definition...which i guess is what i asked (albeit tongue-in-cheek). ...Dave...take three deep breaths and relax ;)
I'm trying out Entropy at the moment, and I have to say I'm impressed! It seems to work almost exactly like Freenet (keybased, same kinds of keys, same syntax for keys), but it's a lot faster. Perhaps like Freenet was in the old days, I don't know. Entropy is actually fast enough to be usable.
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
With current technology, there is no need to kill civilians to win wars. Killing the opposing leadership, forces and infrastructure is sufficient
And killing the infrastructure is not killing civilians exactly how?
Civlians do rely on the infrastructure, water, electricity, gas.....
How do you think food gets into the stores? Roads etc.
How bad was it during the blackout? And that only lasted a couple of hours.
If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
Hi Dave,
:) As an American, I am so proud to have the British as our ally, and I know that through thick and thin, you guys have our backs. Thanks.
My wife was stationed in Germany (Heidleberg) with the U.S. Army, and I visited her there. I met several British soldiers, including special forces, and man, those are blokes with whom I would not want to mess. Not that I would mess with them, anyway
As for the detainees, though, I'm curious, what's your justification for treating them as prisoners of war? I read through the Geneva convention's words on that issue, and I really don't think they qualify. I don't know about the moral issues, but legally, I think the U.S. is in the right here.
In WWII, eight German soldiers infiltrated the U.S. to commit acts of sabotage. They were captured, tried for espionage before a military tribunal, and found guilty. Six were executed, and two served long prison sentences. As they were engaged in clandestine acts of espionage and sabotage, they were not covered under the Geneva convention, and were not Prisoners of War, so it was perfectly legal to try and execute them. How is the current situation with Al Qaeda different?
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
What part of >0.<5.1 don't people understand? How can people claim that we describe Freenet as production ready when the fact that Freenet isn't is embodied in the very name of each release?!
This is not inconsistent in it being downloaded by users, nor is it inconsistent with people using it - since, as anyone familiar with Open Source development, such usage is part of any O.S development process.
Anyone that does choose to use Freenet is encouraged to understand what it does and does not protect at the moment, and those that do, do-so on this basis.
We agreed to resolve these issues by creating a more conservative stable branch of Freenet, and efforts are underway to make this happen as we speak. Bottom line: "Move along, there is nothing to see here".
WHAT PART OF 0.X DON'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND?
If Clarke was trying to mislead people about Freenet's production readiness we would have seen 1.0 long ago.
Moderators - do your thing.
There are way more heterosexual pedophiles. The only reason some people think there are more homosexual than heterosexual pedophiles is because the moral majority has decided in the past to persecute homosexual pedophiles more stringently.
I note that it is fairly acceptable for straight guys to relate their interest in young girls -- sometimes even preteen. It is not acceptable in the gay community, which is so paranoid about what idiots like you will think.
Studies have been done that show sexual response to children to be fairly common in a population of 'normal' people, FYI. It's time people realized this.
_khl
... of the times when I was still using freenet-project.
On IRC, they always were mobbing me because of
OpenBSD, and after two head developers, Ian Clarke
being one of them, named me a Nazi and made tail-
length comparisions, I left.
Not only this saved me from the hassle of putting
up first Java then freenet-project up on OpenBSD
and publishing the results as a service to the
general public, no it also showed me, again, that
many projects have problems with their attitude
(can't exclude MirBSD though).
They were trying to replace fproxy by a Mozilla
(full bloat version) fork with fproxy integrated
at that time. Nothing really stable...
PS: Please don't ask for the IRC logs of when They
offended me - I delete my logs daily.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
In WWII, eight German soldiers infiltrated the U.S. to commit acts of sabotage. They were captured, tried for espionage before a military tribunal, and found guilty. Six were executed, and two served long prison sentences. As they were engaged in clandestine acts of espionage and sabotage, they were not covered under the Geneva convention, and were not Prisoners of War, so it was perfectly legal to try and execute them. How is the current situation with Al Qaeda different?
Well for one thing they were at least charged with something! Some of the prisoners in Guantanamo were ex-taliban and probably meet the definition for prisonners of war, some are Al-Quaida and probably do not. But that's not the point.
The point is that they are EITHER prisonners of war (with specific rights), suspected spies (with specific rights) or common criminals (also with specific rights). Right now the US claim "none of the above". They are held in an artificial legal no man's land by their jailers. Isn't it pretty hypocrytical that they are being held in Cuba to shield them from the jurisdiction of their captor's own tribunals, and yet the same captors do not recognise the jurisdiction on the foreign country they are being held in either either. So whose jurisdiction are they under?
Even the most fierce oponents of this policy do recognise that a great many of them are probably guilty (of something). But having them handled outside any judicial system does not help the cause and sets a HORRIBLE precedent for other countries. I personally find the current situation worse than a mock trial! At least after a mock trial it is known who and where they are, and what they were charged with.
You went and got them in a country 10000 miles away?
Basically what you're trying to say is that it's ok for any country to pick up and detain/execute/whatever any person, as long as he doesn't wear a uniform. Is it ok for China to kidnap an American Falung Gong follower living in New York? Didn't think so. The Geneva Convention doesn't enter into this. It's about basic human rights, which you/your government seems to forget about when it's not about Americans.
Even psychopath serial killers get better treatment in the US.
Of course, "civilians" and "on purpose" are terms that can be applied flexibly.
Are Israelis living in occupied territories civilians, or invaders? Were people living in Hiroshima or Dresden civilians, or as workers in their nations' war industry were they legimate targets? When NATO bombed Kosovo rather than sending in ground troups, keeping soldiers safe while putting civilians at higher risk, were the innocents killed "on purpose"?
No one ever says "we kill innocents on purpose"; everyone adjusted their defintions of guilt and of what is avoidable to suit their own ends.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
All military action creates terror. It's the reason behind phenomena ranging from war dances to atomic bomb tests to "shock and awe" bombing: scare the other side to take the fight out of them.
And a lot of things can create terror. In the 1960s, non-violent Civil Rights marches scared the shit out of a bunch of rascists - did that make King a terrorist?
So the American Revolution was terrorism, not a war? Or did the Continential Congress count as a government?
And if so, why wouldn't the IRA or PLO or Al Quida count as governments rather than terrorist organizations? What does it take to make a government?
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Your example is flawed, many of the people in Guantanemo where taken there after fighting a war in their own country.
In your example that would be like Germany entering France, taking some of the resistance and executing them. They were the bad guys remember.
But I suppose you didn't want to draw that parallel eh.
p.s
Britain is not your ally, Tony Blair is:-)
Bush and Blair ate my sig!
Hardly surprising that you don't have IRC logs of this incident since you were clearly dreaming.
This thing about a 'revolt' is false. First, Ian Clarke endorsed the idea (From the developer newsgroup October 5 2003):
Reskill wrote:
> Stricter upgrading sounds good to me if it helps bring the network out
> of this hole... but I do think that, while the technically minded among
> us play with the latest code, some of us reside on a separate network
> so we can enjoy freenet for what it really is.
>
> For those wanting to give this a try, see http://mids.student.utwente.nl/~mids/freenet/
Lets do this properly and keep it under the project umbrella. The last
thing we need are different competing and deliberately incompatable
Freenet versions.
Basically stable should be reverted to whatever the current consensus is
on a stable version, and we need two separate seedlists.
I already have a seednode harvester set up, I can easily set up two each
specific to a different network provided there are volunteers who will
make their nodes available for seeding.
Ian.
Second, this is split (making a second network from a older (ver. 692) more functioning version) is win-win for everyone. The new secondary Freenet network I was on was much faster then the current one (Getting 100,000 kilobytes per second thoughput, and that was just because there is a default cap of 100,000). And the developers get a network to study that has 1 build, instead of a willy-nilly collection of many different builds.
ICQ was released in late 1996. It's /STILL/ a 0.x "beta" product, and always will be.
... I dare say hundreds of thousands use it, if you count OpenSSH using it, then millions do.
OpenSSL is at 0.97
o/~ Join us now and share the software
The detainees at Guantanamo are not being tried. The problem is that these people are in a legal limbo. If they committed crimes, try them and punish them. But we have no way of knowing what these people are even accused of doing.
To believe that our government would not detain innocent people is to be naive to the point of absurdity.
The point here is that locking people up indefinitely, with no right to face their accusers and defend themselves, is unAmerican, and should be deeply offensive to every real American. We should all resent the erosion of America's reputation as the world's greatest bastion of liberty and justice. If we lose that, we've lost something a whole lot more important than anything the terrorists can take from us.
Some people, though, get off by mislabelling both so that others will download it. Put up what you prefer, but label it appropriate. Many people don't have a problem with other people enjoying their variety of pr0n (be it by preference or fetish - so long as it is legal), but it's really a pain when you download a 125MB file only to find it is something else.While I accept pr0n for "alternative preferences" than my own, it's definately not a turn-on. With the illegal stuff, it's even worse, because now it's been on my hard-drive, and were it to be found it would look bad even if it hadn't been what I was looking for.
It's an assumption, but perhaps this is what the parent was discussion, as I have noticed the behavior of posting such material mislabelled is becoming too prolific in P2P lately.
There's no way to ensure that those N-fold people actually stay with the program, and not quit/delete data/fake storing data.
If you gather up a bunch of say 5 friends, which all store data on multiple disks or with redundancy (RAID1 / RAID5), located in different areas (no natural disasters taking out all) running different systems (not all taken by same Windoze worm) you'll have better data security than 1000 random P2P users.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Second, this is split (making a second network from a older (ver. 692) more functioning version) is win-win for everyone. The new secondary Freenet network I was on was much faster then the current one (Getting 100,000 kilobytes per second thoughput, and that was just because there is a default cap of 100,000).
Yeah. 100,000 kilobytes. 100 Megabytes. 800 Megabit throughput per second. Where's this, Freenet over Internet 2?
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Finally, some sanity in this discussion.
Not exactly p2p as it operates between named entities, but this may be the solution for the problem:b s/index.html
http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~emin/source_code/di
Making a more conservative "stable" code branch isn't going to improve anything if the underlying network (by which I mean the vast body of nodes and datastores) doesn't work. The difference between a Yugo and a Porsche is irrelevant when the roads are flooded.
What Freenet needs, and what fredisdead hopes to accomplish, is a network on which routing actually routes, and datastores actually store data. It would be icing on the cake of address resolution keys actually resolved addresses, too. The trouble with the development network is that it's too big, and too unwieldy, to do anything efficiently with the current routing algorithms. Freenet has serious issues with scalability, and the fact that most users don't want to run the daily-upgrade treadmill doesn't seem to be helping.
We can move a lot of traffic, and most of the whiny users, onto a separate "production" network. If the effort takes off, it'll be big enough to provide useful anonymity but small enough that routing might still be functional. Then development can continue, hopefully with a more enthusiastic user base, which can upgrade every time Toad sneezes and help debug Next-Generation Routing, which I'm still optimistic about.
You're absolutely right that Freenet has always been straightforward about its status as a work in progress. "Stable" is, in the sense that it doesn't spontaneously stop accepting connections, or decide to use 100% CPU for no apparent reason. But "stable" and "useful" are two vastly different things. The users that Freenet has attracted want something useful. If the development network begins to outperform the production network, then perhaps another switch will be in order. But there's no sense in trying to force users to remain on a useless network when they obviously have things to get done and are willing to split off in order to accomplish them.
In the grand scheme of things, I agree that fredisdead is a minor event that's probably not deserving of a Slashdot story. But it's a social statement: Freenet is too interesting, and too widely publicized, to remain so broken for so long. Develop, test, and develop some more. But don't drag everyone along for the bumpy ride.
...and not reporting the positive news out of Iraq.
What exactly is the positive news out of Iraq? That most people are still unemployed? That there are open revolts by citizens? That crime has increased by several magnitudes? What you are getting is pretty positive. Things are FAR WORSE than you are led to believe. For instance, very few journalists cover the deaths of innocent Iraqis which happen on a daily basis. When was the last time you heard an Iraqi death reported?
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
It seems to be a typo, but why not try it out?
Here are a few mirror sites where freenet.jar content build can be found:
http://misty.d2dc.net:65535/pub/freenet
http://www.geocities.com/freenetfid/
Funny thing is that the world governments tend to try and tell people that this is an objective decision when it's entirely subjective and tends to depend on who's paying for the ideological dissemination of information.
The worst thing is that the citizens of the world simply accept the govt propaganda as truth.
eg 'Sandinistas' - 'Freedom Fighters'; 'Al Queda' - 'Terrorists'
You made a mistake. Sandinistas are not freedom fighters according to the US govt (I assume you are talking about the US govt perspective). I think you had the Nicaraguan contras in mind (they were considered 'freedom fighters'). I have the best example (which is actually kind of ironic):
"Al Qaida" in 1989: freedom fighters
Al Qaida in 1999: terrorists
Usama bin Laden in 1989: key friend of USA
Usama bin Laden in 1999: public enemy #1
Needless to say, the same person/group carrying out hte same activities are considered differently.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
I suggest you go and watch Clerks. When you get to the part about the independent contractors and the Death Star, you will be enlightened.
"Boylove" and "gay" have a common history. It's not accidental that gays have been accused of having something to do with child/youth sexuality. Much of the homosexuality described in art and history has been pederastic. In the past 20 years, in reaction to heavy political and social pressures, gay has been defined away from it's historical precedents, and it's social agenda, to be an exclusively adrophilic homosexuality. The high tension between the concepts of "boylove" and "gay" is partially a product of our recent history of sexual liberation, and the cultural wars thereof. (I could go on...)
Anyway, it isn't true that most boylovers only love boys. Some boylovers identify as gay and also love men. Some boylovers are straight with sexual tendencies towards boys. Many are married, or in long term homosexual relationships with adults. Many, of course, are not attracted to adults of either gender in the least.
Probably a significant proportion of homosexual boylovers are more exclusively attracted to boys due to the political wars that have gone on during the past 20 years. The gay community is one of the most vocal opponents to the concept of boylove, even though many gay men are themselves attracted primarily to teens and boys. This is because of the constant, prejudicial accusation of gay men as child molesters. The men who can adapt to an androphile (gay) exterior prefer this mode of existance to living under a more consonant, but embattled identity (boylove, pederasty, etc).
So, while your commentary carries some truth, it is much more complex than that.
_khl
I've seen it, know the part you mean. It's great.
(Oh, and crack-smoking moderators: flamebait is something posted to generate a flamewar. An honestly expressed idea posted to an existing thread may be offtopic, but is not flamebait.)
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
(aka Osama Bin Laden:)
What do you mean?! I *was* doing research on structural integrity, you unsensitive clod!
"When was the last time you heard an Iraqi [civilian] death reported? "
Every day on Fox News and CNN. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Things aren't far worse than what we have been led to believe, since we haven't been told anything other than the truth of what is happening.
"For example, you can have a school (a socialist institution) under anarchism without any problems"
....discredited anarchism by equating it with ... 'anarchy'...."
Well, there is one little problem: once you have strong government present, it is not anarchism.
"BUT there is one KEY difference. Any institution or relationship or structure under anarchism must be VOLUNTARY."
No, anarchism means no government. It does not mean "any government no matter how oppressive as long as it is voluntary". Besides, any "socalist" institution, such as what you mentioned, is not voluntary.
"Status-quo supporters
Shocking! That is outrageous! It is as bad as if someone equated catholicism with catholics!
"'. An anarchist society will have none of that..."
It can't exist, since once you get more than a few people together you have government. The most anarchist society has been proposed by the Libertarian Party, which for better or worse advocates the least government of anyone.
The Emma Goldsmans who claim to be furthering anarchy by having the government take away more freedoms from the people are for the birds. Literally, coo-coo.
In WWII, eight German soldiers infiltrated the U.S. to commit acts of sabotage. They were captured, tried for espionage before a military tribunal, and found guilty. Six were executed, and two served long prison sentences. As they were engaged in clandestine acts of espionage and sabotage, they were not covered under the Geneva convention, and were not Prisoners of War, so it was perfectly legal to try and execute them. How is the current situation with Al Qaeda different?
Well, the Supreme Court decision that said the military had the right to try and execute them was based on an interpretation of U.S. laws that have been totally overhauled (by Congress) in the ~60 years since that case, so what was legal then may no longer be.
iirc, ianal
--
Benjamin Coates