Slashdot Mirror
New "Dark" Freenet Available for Testing
Sanity writes "The Freenet Project has just released the first alpha version of the much anticipated Freenet 0.7 branch. This is a major departure from past approaches to peer-to-peer network design, embracing a 'scalable darknet' architecture, where security is increased by allowing users to limit which other peers their peer will communicate with directly, rather than the typical 'promiscuous' approach of classic P2P networks. This means that not only does Freenet aim to prevent others from finding out what you are doing with Freenet, it makes it extremely difficult for them to even know that you are running a Freenet node at all. This is not the first P2P application to use this approach, other examples include Waste, however those networks are limited to just a few users, while Freenet can scale up almost indefinitely. The new version also includes support for NAT hole-punching, and has an API for third-party tool development. As always, the Freenet team are asking that people support the development of the software by donating."
I, for one, welcome our dark freenet overlords.
Chums up, let's do this!
This looks interesting. I tried Freenet before, but I could never set it up properly. I will have to try it again.
---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
Hooray! Now I can browse the net at dialup speeds once more!
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
The Heading of the parent should have been 'Interesting' or 'Can't wait to try it out.' I guess I was simultaneously thinking about two posts and confused myself.
---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
Now I can propogate my terrorism plans more efficiently, all while finding exciting new sources of kiddy porn.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
For example, do you think Google will ever use Freenet in some manner?
I wish there was a way that I could view websites without giving any IP or client information. However, that kind of information is important to webmasters and business.
Thank you freenet team! The ability to remain anonymous is the only way to ensure complete freedom of speech.
I totally agree. With the lawmakers obviously unconcerned about the steady erosion of civil liberties, practical measures like these could be the only option for maintaining our freedoms.
Read Pynchon.
I'm not a member or involved in the freenet project but if you have paypal or whatever, drop by the freenet project website and donate a few dollars. Mathew Toseland (toad_ on freenode irc) has been slaving away on the project for a long time now, he's poured so much energy into making freenet a reality, kudos to him and a few of the other coders that have spent a lot of energy on the next generation freenet (nextgens/cyberdo/etc.)
Not related to freenet but in the definitely in the same sphere of anonymous networking is I2P. For anybody that interested in that kind of technology should check that out... it's a fairly well functioning network ATM but the main coder is putting off any big announcements until he's sure it's ready.
Freenet is neat, P2P research is phenomenal, darknets are probably the way to go...but boy, it would be nice to have something that is not implemented in Java.
I understand the reasons that they use Java, but still, Freenet is one RAM and CPU-hungry beast.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Only criminals ever need privacy or anonymity.
Well I don't believe that child pornography is a form of speech, free or otherwise.
As I'm sure anyone who's used Freenet before knows (Rob Malda, would, for sure!), Freenet is a haven for child pornographers, and this crosses the line between protecting the rights of privacy and protecting the rights of children. How dare you, slashdot.
First, there's the "dual effect" question. If you set out to support political dissent, whistleblowers, and the like, are you unethical if a side effect is to enable immoral activities? In this case, a predictable side effect? If you have no way of knowing whether you're facilitating it?
Then there's the question: if Freenet is needed, is it right to decide not to run a node because you abhor some of the traffic?
I don't know the answers but do respect your decision.
What are you saying, that black persons can not use P2P the same way as light-skins? Give me a break.
Now if only they could figure out a way to allow for multi-port + hidden IP + encrypted anonymous bittorrent file transfers inside Darknet without losing speed etc, and the DRM, MPAA, China et all, can say 'good-bye it was a nice try' !
Ok that was a lame rhyme, but you get the point!
Anon
I think the main problem with freenet, I2P, and other similar services is not their privacy concerns (although important), but SPEED.
The speed at which any of these services run reminds me of when I had dial-up. Except these darknets don't even guarantee you can connect to even the most popular darknet sites. Even when I tweaked all the settings I couldn't ever get decent connections on freenet.
These sites are not going to be very viable until a lot of people use them, and a lot of people aren't going to use them until they reach something at least comparable to speeds of the regular web.
I appreciate all the effort of the people who make these pieces of software, but I can't help but feel much of their energy is misdirected.
Just my thoughts.
But if you don't know three people who are using Freenet 0.7, hop on IRC (which is not the least bit anonymous) and see if some random stranger will give you their noderef. Random people who don't know each other exchanging noderefs over IRC provides what advantage over the prior Freenet implementation, exactly?
I don't know 3 other meatspace people who use Freenet, much less Freenet 0.7. I can't imagine that trading noderefs with some random person on IRC is any more secure than maintaining a node on 0.5.
I'm no Freenet hater, I've been running it for years and I've made several donations. Freenet showed me the "Diebold Memos" and other interesting items. I'm just looking for a plain-English explanation as to how 0.7 is an improvement over the prior Freenet implementation.
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
The GNAA is dead. You can't even make a half way funny /. troll anymore. The fact that an even lamer organization such as Buttes can take over your server for two times is a testament to this fact.
You're better off jacking off to degenerate Japanese animu with your wrinkly old ugly jap wife.
*GNAA is Dead
Modern Java virtual machines can actually be more efficient than native code in many situations. The old criticism of Java, that it is slow, and a CPU/memory hog relative to native compiled code, was definitely valid back in the 90s, but is much less-so now. Check out some recent benchmarks involving Java if you don't believe me.
On 31 Mar 2006, at 20:08:
> This isn't about *technical* support, I just wanted to tell Matthew
> thanks
> for working on this project. The US government is really scaring
> me and
> I'm glad someone's working on this. You're doing a great job man.
>
> One question I have is that the paypal balance on the home page
> usually
> says something like a few hundred $, and I was wondering if it's
> actually
> generating the required $2300 per month, or if it's falling short.
> I've
> had a monthly donation set up for quite a while now, and I just
> want to
> make sure everything is going well financially for the project.
We have been fortunate enough to generate just about enough to pay
for Matthew for the past few years, but donations have been tailing
off as we haven't put out any new releases in quite a while due to
our work on 0.7, and the financial situation is actually quite
precarious just now.
Our hope is that with the 0.7 alpha release we will get some
donations, but if anyone can contribute, now would really be the time
(as there can be no guarantee that the 0.7 alpha release will
generate the level of publicity we have seen for previous releases).
Ian.
sounds like p2p is evolving to avoid the likes of *aa... great to have free speech and all that, but suppose it gets bigger and every child porn nut job hops on it and starts downloading... couldnt the gov/isp's step in and kill it? not sure if its even possible anywhere to outlaw a program/technology...
Any screenshots of the app?
Here's my 'freenet/Darknet' wishlist for the next release (hopefuly it won't take another 5 years before any major break throughs):
... you punch through making your traffic seem like standard protocols. An advanced version of this would allow you to load balance your traffic over multiple standard look-alike protocols, thus forcing ISP's to not be able to track (through agregate port router bandwidth stats) which new protocol/port you are using now so they could block it. Also, by allowing multi-protocol chaotic support that means each group of users would be using different protocols & ports... now try to stop that Mr. China firewall!
1) Bittorrent/utorrent inside Darknet support. (i.e. encrypted semi-anonymous file transfers)
2) Full IP anonymity
3) Multi-port support (i.e. when firewalls block it, you can change ports).
4) User selected periodic chaotic deep packet protocol emulation. Say what?! Imagine if you could download from a list of popular standard protocols & configure your Darknet client to emulate most of these protocols (one at a time & announcing the new protocol to your group of file-exchange-buddies)- anytime you want. You'd periodically select a new protocol (i.e. FTP, HTTP, OSPF, DNS, etc every time some advanced firewall blocks you) & BAM
5) Proxy bounce support
6) Open source API for additional protocol bounce support. (i.e. allows for crackers/hackers of restrictive/oppressive nations to piggy back Darknet inside a legit Server running say FTP or something of the sort) - Once the trusted server is infiltrated, it could allow for proxied clients to connect through it and out to the rest of the world.
I'm sure some of you could come up with more utopian anonymous & liberative strategies.
Cheers
adeptus_luminati
No trees were killed in the making of this post; however, many trillions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.
Its too bad its written in java.. if it was in C/C++ i would have run a node...
Just find a developer who does a C++ implementation based on the sample code of wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/). It shouldn't be that difficult and is cross-platform as well. Sorry, no I don't have the time to do it myself but I'll help with advice.
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
I have an automatic donation to Freenet of $20 per month set up. These guys really need some support, especially now between versions.
...and still browse the internet at dialup speeds. ;)
this link is a test
Okay, so how good is Freenet's network this time? I went to check there once. The first thing I saw was a big fat warning message stating that there's child porn on their network, but that they don't want to remove it because people are supposed to freely share without others being able to delete their content. And yeah, after clicking "I accept", the second thing I saw was that a substantial amount of nodes linked to the stuff.
Frankly, what the hell is up with that? I don't want to use a "fully anonymous" sharing network when I have to browse through such disgusting content to find what I can also find on other networks just fine.
- Ian (Founder, Freenet Project)
welcome the idea that our overlords will have a harder time censoring and surveilling us.
So this means that all this time people thought they were safe and now to be safe you have to pick who you share with?
How the hell is that going to happen? So you get on a e-mail list and find some "buddies" to share with. How do you know who they are? Are they "enforcers" or spys? How do you know?
Then you find a group of people who are sharing, how do you know there ain't a spy among them?
Then you have only a few people to share with and since everyone is splitting off the main sharing network, who gives a crap if this thing can "scale"? There's nothing to scale to, just 10 people sharing in a group, big deal.
Why not just use SFTP with your "trusted friends"????
This is the most lame thing I have ever seen in P2P!
The old way it worked was better, and more safe why the hell change it?
What happened? That's the important news!
What's wrong with things like "MUTE" P2P ? http://www.planetpeer.de/wiki/index.php
How is this different from just trading files with friends and friends-of-friends using sftp?
(I'm probably repeating things that have already been said, but I need to say my piece.)
Certain people are going to do unsavory things to children regardless of whether or not they have an audience. I have always failed to see the extra harm done through dissemination of such material. Would you rather that no evidence be distributed, so that the children suffer in silence? Certainly the extra indignity is insignificant in comparison to the original act.
Truly, I do not understand. Do you somehow think that the urge to abuse children is somehow viral, and that child pornography will "infect" others?
Any way I look at it, all objections to Freenet seem to boil down to one of two things:
1. "By golly, we have to do something about all of this child pr0n!"
2. "I don't want to get in trouble with the authorities."
The problem with #1 is that there isn't anything you really can do about it, and any symbolic act has the effect of harming legitimate use. IANAL, but I think that since, by probability, there isn't necessarily anything illegal flowing through your node, you have plausible deniability. As long as you run it on computers for which you have permission to use in this way, it's unlikely that you will get in any trouble.
If you don't want to participate, then that's fine with me, but make sure that you remember that convincing others not to use Freenet provides no viable benefit to children under abuse and harms legitimate attempts to exercise free speech.
>> [Because of Java] Freenet is one RAM and CPU-hungry beast.
The main criticisms thrown at Java (overheads and speed) always seem to miss the key matter entirely, as far as I am concerned. because those issues can be fixed, whereas others can't.
Execution overheads can always be reduced and JIT performance can always be improved, and the effect of VM overheads on overall speed becomes ever less significant anyway as our hardware becomes more capable. But there are two things that are getting worse, not better.
Those two things are Java bloat and hence complexity, and Java non-portability.
Java growth is monotonic -- there is never any reduction in its footprint, only increase, because developers usually add code and very rarely eliminate whole sections of it. What used to be a fairly concise VM with a few auxiliary libraries is now an extremely large and hairy monster. And with size comes complexity, and with complexity come continual maintenance, latent bugs, and insecurities. Java has become a liability instead of an asset as a side effect of its unstoppable growth.
And secondly, the "write once, run anywhere" paradigm has failed utterly and turned into a "write once, run only in the few places where gurus have waved magic garlic". Why this is so I have no idea, since the VM is 100% portable in theory. What's probably happened is that the extreme mess of libraries make simple all-inclusive installation pretty much impossible, and the design is unhelpful in that it doesn't bother to search for missing bits in default locations, but I'm speculating about that.
Whatever the reasons, throughout the many years since Java hit the scene (I go back to the dawn of time in OO), Java has managed to work on perhaps 10% of the many dozens of highly varied Unix-type boxes that I have owned or worked on. This contrasts with 100% of those boxes running C/C++, Perl, Python, Tcl, Lua, etc etc. All modern languages seem to work pretty much everywhere, with one exception -- Java. This is very wierd, for a language which is supposed to run anywhere.
So that's my beef with Java, a great pity because gramatically and in concept the language is terrific. Sadly, neither of those two problems will go away, because (i) developers will never shrink the system (that's simply not done), and (ii) Java fanboys simply refuse to believe that their beloved system has extremely poor portability in practice.
So, for me Java is in dead end street, unfortunately. And it's not that I don't like it, quite the opposite. It's simply too big and too selective in where it chooses to run.
There is also Nodezilla as a very promising anynmous network (grid oriented). It offers file sharing but also distributed storrage, photo sharing, RTP streams relaying.
http://www.nodezilla.net/
I've just finished setting up the new server, some quick specs: 3.2ghz p4, 100mbps uplink, 1.2TB datastore, 4gb ram
Once you've finished setting up your node, get on irc.freenode.net #TekNet (#Freenet is also a good idea). Paste your key url in the channel and it should be parsed & added automatically.
Server key is in the channel topic, please note that this node is publically accepting all keys, so therefor is no longer a "darknet"
At the time of posting, it currently has accrued approximately 40 active links, which is the most seen so far tonight for a node.
Its all dialup speeds, and anyway, freenet is notorious for its "illicit" content. Not for me.
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
Start your own net with your friends and their own friends and so on.
For more information see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friend-to-friend
You know, you Java proponents have been saying those exact words since the 90's. And you've constantly refered to becnhmarks. Still, java apps runs slowly for the most part, hogs the memory - and most importantly, it doesn't play nice with any other application running.
Those benchmarks are most likely heavily tuned setups with nothing else running at the same time. Not a real world scenario at all (in the real world, it's easy to observe that it's all lies, or at least just statistics).
But to each his own. Most Java dudes have dug themselves in too deep in "Java is the best and faster than C++" that they can never change their mind or even try something else at least to broaden their views. Have fun. I think it's narrowminded to say the least.
The comment that Freenet is largely used for distributing child pornography...
Is probably true, there are very few people who really need this kind of protection at the moment and it's disturbing but one of these groups is child pornographers.
Slashbots think that the parent poster is commiting a logical fallicy of some form (likely the slippery slope form) when in fact he is perfectly correct.
What he isn't taking into account is that these nets need to be running and populated when censorship does occur so that everyone involved with them can't be labelled a traitor.
As far as child pornography and mitigating circumstances, exposure to child pornography does lead people to be more likely to molest children. Molesting children has pretty serious consequnces on their mental health throughout their life(partially because of the views of society towards molestation). This is something it's pretty tough to condone, I think Freenet is a good idea if we need to trade a small increase in pedophilia for a permanent venue for free speech I think that is a trade off we will need to accept.
If pedophilia grows out of hand we may need to curtail these dark nets but that too becomes a tricky proposition.
Because he IS a pederast. I got the pictures right here from Freenet...
If it's distributed for free on FreeNet, that means fewer and fewer people paying for it, which hopefully means less child porn all-together.
Only if pornographers are motivated mainly for money.
As a Slashdot contributor, you know that some people are ready to work for no pay if they get other compensation.
Are you making the same claims [about] the creators and owners of usenet?
There is no cabal.
I give up. Yet anonther network reset. I gave up freenet a long time ago because it does nto give backwards compatibilty. The strenght of a p2p network is the number of users. This developer attitude network kills off all content reguraly and makes sure that the network stays small.
Since anonimy in freenet is archieved by hiding in the masses, by keeping the mass small, there is not as much anonimty as you would like or could archieve.
What bugs me is that the only place to download this is slashdotted because its directly linked from the FreeNet page instead of proper SF mirroring.
If you don't want to participate, then that's fine with me, but make sure that you remember that convincing others not to use Freenet provides no viable benefit to children under abuse and harms legitimate attempts to exercise free speech.
If Freenet works as advertised, it will make it easier for abusers to swap stories, images, techniques, etc. without being caught.
You say: Certain people are going to do unsavory things to children regardless of whether or not they have an audience. [...] Would you rather that no evidence be distributed, so that the children suffer in silence?
Suppose you are correct that the amount of child abusers does not depend on the internet being available. Then the internet has been a great thing, since it has allowed the capture of many disturbed people who post evidence of their own crimes.
Freenet would reverse this effect. It would make it harder to catch and convinct child abusers.
Darknets is another reason why EU passed the much debated data retention act. All TCP connections (in EU) has to be logged together with the timestamps and amount of data transferred. Darknets will show upp pretty clear on such connection graphs. When some illegal information is found on a box, it is easy to trace up who the neighbouring nodes are -- and go there to search their boxes.
...
One should also note that there are much more illegal information in some of EU countries than kiddie prn:
- possession of pirated software/music/movies is illegal in some countries
- political/historical discussions like contesting the accepted extent of WWII holocaust
-
Any entity which can tap your ISP's next-hop router can tell if you're running Freenet due to the large quantity of encrypted traffic flowing in and out.
If we're talking about, say, a citizen of an oppressive regime attempting to communicate secretly over the internet, it is a fair assumption that the said regime can tap all the citizen's traffic through their ISP (who will co-operate, or they will lose their ISP licence).
nt
Great. We're already paying cops to sit on their ass in a cube all day pretending to be 13-year-old girls. Now we're going to pay for them to brag about their dynamite movie/music/program libraries? Sounds like a painfully banal job all day every day.
It performs well and is actually pretty usable for downloading files. Oh, and it's had this particular feature for at least 6 months. http://www.gnunet.org/.
I am trolling
There is no such thing as a 'hidden' network. Not to your ISP, not to your legal system, and not to your government. Packets are packets and that is that. Routers see them, switches see them and traffic sniffing sees them. This whole 'dark' sup3rs3ckr3t n3tw0rk sounds like a bunch of baloney to me. The only way you can possibly get around any problems with getting busted for pirating music/software on p2p is to meet in a dark alley somewhere and swap cds. Even then, you'll probably IM on yahoo to meet and get busted anyway.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Um, China and other nations (not "Western Liberal Democracies (sic)") are the only ones that have a need for Freenet?
a nscript&dte=2005-06-22&headlineid=981
http://news.sbs.com.au/dateline/index.php?page=tr
What Australians put up with lately. No, it's not "communist literature." It's about illegal war-mongering and the distortion of intelligence to justify the whole Iraq thing.
The government's PSYOP crews have done a spectacular job brainwashing sheep as well as slashbots that "if you've got nothing to hide then you don't need Freenet" and "if you like Freenet, you're a child pr0n consumer" or whatever. Good work, dickheads.
We need actually have a need for Freenet _now_, and it doesn't involve hiding our stashes of kiddy pr0n or terrorist plots.
It's much more efficient to perform a man-in-the-middle attack. The you can let the paedophiles and terrorists brag to each other while you sit quietly in the middle and collect evidence. ;-)
You can send your $50 to the Croquet project...a P2P, fully interactive, 3D metaverse written in Squeak Smalltalk with an opensource license and a working prototype.
This place our dungeon, not our safe retreat
Beyond his potent arm, to live exempt
From Heaven's high jurisdiction, in new league
Banded against his throne, but to remain
In strictest bondage, though thus far removed,
Under th' inevitable curb, reserved
His captive multitude.
Paradise Lost, Book II, Lines 317-323
Fighting from our dark places isn't really going to win this battle for Freedom. I appreciate what Freenet is doing. It's securing our fallback position. We need that, but we need more a willingness on the part of our citizenry to take the fight to the day-lit streets of the Mall in Washington D.C.
I'd rather be free by liberty and than free by obscurity.
Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/linux.html
-Tom
In this new Freenet, network connections only pass through a select few friends, but the routing layer hides this - files are globally available, as they used to be. You've misunderstood the protocol design.
Also, you've even misunderstood the "select few friends" thing. It's not that you can exclude people. It's that you have to actively include people - and you have to have their permission first.
An analogy would be: passing messages between people by telling a trusted friend, he tells his trusted friend, and so on until it reaches the destination.
I believe that people who molest children are ill in their head, I mean, for the majority of us, if we look at a young girl, we are not attracted to them at all, its just one of those things...your just not at all. So if someone is, then surly their is something wrong with them. The majority of us are not, so if their is a small number who are, then I guess there must be something wrong with them.
So, that being said, if you do start looking at CP and if you do have this tendency in your head then I think this tendency will "come out" and not "be created" as some people are stating. If you look at CP to start with...then their must be something in your head urging you to. If any of us who are not like this come across a link for CP then we don't click on it do we...as we know what we will see the other side. So to start off, you need to have something in your head to push you to start looking at this material.
So all in all, I think its something that is their...Some people are molesters because it has happened to them, or some are (I think the term is circumstantial paedophiles) where they are not actually pedo's just a traumatic event pushes them to do this, or I believe its just something that's in their brain that only effects a small proportion of people. So in closing, I think that looking at CP is not making people be molesters or doing that kind of thing, just doing something that they like all along. Also if looking at CP makes people molesters, then what about people who do it without ever looking at CP. Think back to Shakespeare times, girls used to marry and such like at very young ages. I think it was in Hamlet the wife back then would have been 14 or something, I don't know enough about Shakespeare to be 100%, just something I remember my English teacher telling me
Visit My Blog at http://spaces.msn.com/members/chrisharries
Since the rights of the unborn (read: abortion) has become the ultimate litmus-test in meatspace, has kiddy porn become the Internet equivalent?
Of course that is a rhetorical question, and the answer is obvously a resounding "yes". So, from this point forward, in the spirit of intellectual honesty, let us all agree that any discussion of privacy, freedom of speech or anonymity on the Internet shall descend into a polarized debate over the evils of child pornography. Terrorism and illicit file sharing came in second and third, respectively.
You have officially "gotten the memo".
There's a Starman, waiting in the sky / He'd like to come and meet us, but he hasn't got the time.
You know, one way to generate more funds is to go back and actually email thank-yous to the people who sent you PayPal funds over the years.
*miffed*
Then again I used to work for the government, I know that they could program something like this, but it would be clunky, crash constantly, no one would use it, and only work running under ASAS-L or CHIMS, which is always the first thing to get deleted off the system by the local techs. (always loved that we would delete over half the cost of these overpriced computers the first day we got them).
YouStockIt - Education through Unorthodox Methods
This program is pretty much useless so long as it depends on the java vm which is non-free and closed source. You can only be as secure and anonymous as Sun wants you to be.
Hi, just a quick question. Does it consume 300 Mb of virtual memory or resident memory? Can you check ps or top? Or are you running freenet on windows? Oh, and which JVM do you use? Sun? IBM? GIJ?
Some VMs have a habbit of mmaping huge gobs of ram (Sun's JVM v1.5 for AMD64 linux takes up ~1.7gb of VIRTUAL memory). This memmory is not really consumed, it is just shown in various diagnostic tools.
I tried running java apps and checking how much free memory got decreased. An app with default memory settings uses ~80-120 mb RAM. Most of it is JVM overhead/libraries/etc. Apps run with 64 mb of heap maximum by default, so they should not be able to grow to 300 mb real usage, unless freenet does start java with -XmxLOTSmb switches.
--Coder
NO CARRIER
I agree with you, for the most part. However, I've thought about this particular point a bit and I think I might be able to shed some light on it.
Most programming languages are themselves written in C (or C++ in a few cases). Java, Perl, Python, and Tcl all fit this model. Thus, none of these languages can be ported to a platform until there is a working C compiler for the platform; as far as the basic functionality of the language is concerned, no other language is more portable than C for that reason. Furthermore, most of these languages (with the notable exception of Java) rely on the POSIX standards for the OS interface on most platforms. Porting them to another platform is trivial if that platform is POSIX-compliant. Thus, most of these language run on most UNIX platforms automatically. (Windows support is more difficult, but that's only one extra platform.)
Java, on the other hand, has its own "virtual machine" specification, separate from the POSIX standards, and in some places in conflict with them. Furthermore, the JIT features require that a complete machine-language optimizing compiler be created for each hardware architecture. Thus, the effort of porting the Java JIT runtime to a new platform, even a POSIX-compliant one, is greater than the effort of porting the C compiler itself. Add to that the cost of building new, optimized, low-level implementations of the system libraries and you have the perfect recipe for a porting nightmare. In short, on UNIX platforms, Java will never be as portable as C (or any POSIX/C interpreted language).
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
unlike regular porn, child porn and abuse is intrinsecally tied up with real-life networks, so it's possible for someone to infiltrate them like they've been always doing. In this I see no difference between using a darknet and not using it. Before the internet the distribution channels were always private and secret. Plus, another reason it doesn't get distributed widely is that a price must be paid.
In any case, we should fight so that freedom of speech does NOT require darknets to work. Darknets should be necessary to work in opressive governments, but we need to get to the root, too.
This becomes a complex ethical problem - what must we do so that our actions to protect our freedom (of speech) won't benefit criminals, too?
You forget that child pornography is not just an ungodly perversion, it is also a fully commercialized illegal INDUSTRY.
In addition to the producers (those you are referring to) there are also consumers. It's a typical supply-demand scheme and providing means for secure distribution does one thing only - facilitates their trade.
If you were not running anonymizing node on your box, some asshole would've not been able to download more 'material' and this would've not caused the supplier to increase its volume. Ie to rape another child.
Comprende ?
3.243F6A8885A308D313
I _can_ kill a person.
I think you are confusing Freedom with impunity.
They are neither contingent nor corollary. Many very smart people would argue that they are often mutually exclusive...not least in so far as your freedom ends at my fist.
Ubuntu 5.04 Sun Java 5 rev 4 downloaded, sudo tar -xzf into /usr/local attempted the install under sudo and got
... in links or opera
Detected freenet-ext.jar
Detected freenet.jar
Starting Freenet now: Command line: java -Xmx128m freenet.node.Main
Done
and got
nice: java: No such file or director
no go to http:/// 127
I used Freenet for a couple of weeks, and ditched it specifically because of the pedophile issue. I am 100% on board with the theoretical arguments behind Freenet, and am willing to accept that the price of freedom may be existance of materials I find horrible. HOWEVER, the mere existance of kiddie porn on Freenot is not what I have a problem with. My problem is that the owners of the largest Freenet directory sites go out of their way to link to and promote kiddie porn freesites.
They seem to view this as being their "duty" to freedom... but I have yet to hear a REMOTELY credible argument for why acceptance of a negative thing requires you voluntarily going out of your way to promote that thing. The thought of data packets that I wouldn't like running through my computer? I can live with that. The thought of having my application direct you by default to sites which deliberately link to the stuff and make it easy to find? You're nuts.
Also similar to Internet vs. Web, you can write your own clients for Freenet (for the Freenet protocol). You're not limited to what the developers have provided for you out of the box.
0.7 will, if I understand things correctly, support almost exactly the scenario you describe (queuing downloads within the main Freenet program itself). The spidering part you'll have to write yourself though. Or...
(And parent got modded "Insightful" for what amounts to "Internet == Web"? Yikes.)
People have the right to be left alone.
More power to the FreeNet
More power to the People
Just a note:
I was part of a WASTE darknet for two years. We regularly had up to 250 users and over 8 terabytes being shared without any problems, so it is scalable at least to some extent.
"Way cool software, just not anything I'd use."
Seriously. A bog-standard citizen of the semi-free world (England) doesn't have any immediate need for Freenet.
Random packet-filler before encryption and interval randomization of packets both incoming and outgoing. On top of that, steganography.
The Internet is the most efficient method dissidents currently possess of communicating, if they have good software tools. Phones can be run through a listening bank, mail can be opened and read, and Internet packets can be parsed... all these things become equally secure, however, using the above time-tested methods of covert communication.
However, transmitting by reading your secured message over a phone line is very low bandwidth, and will usually only communicate text (unless one speaks for several hours, which is in itself very suspicious... then again, you could always apply a vocal cipher to JPEG data, and read that). Mail containing magnetic/optical media may already be under very heavy suspicion, and may never get through at all because of this factor, so all that can usually be sent is paper (Microdot-sized data storage aside, as we're assuming it would be very hard to sneak this kind of printing technology into [the majority of] the dissidents' hands. If it were easy, they would just exchange information "by hand" as well.)
The Internet can be very efficient at sending huge amounts of data, and has the amazing advantage that proxies can be created almost at will (networks/PCs can be hijacked very quickly to act as new ones, for example.)
"I think it was in Hamlet the wife back then would have been 14 or something, I don't know enough about Shakespeare to be 100%, just something I remember my English teacher telling me"
:)
Maybe your english teacher was dropping a hankie
Matthew
hey, she is very good looking and always bent over with her low cut tops, it was a win win situation as a teenager, I deffently wasnt going to disagree with what she had to say :)
Visit My Blog at http://spaces.msn.com/members/chrisharries