Yes, what do people expect some magical network that gives you stuff for free?
Freenet is only as good as the nodes that connect to it. What it needs is people to use perminant nodes, with high bandwidth and better computers. If you have one, connect and support freedom of speech.
Eventually you will have to download Freenet anyway, so might as well download it now and help it improve (often new improvements occur weekly) since do you think the likes of the RIAA or Government will give up easily?
A better way of showing how American government works is by voting these two idiots out of office in the next election.
People from all over the USA, not just in the two states they are in, should do campaigns (via email, door to door, etc.) to get them out, and hopefully somemone better in.
"If the individual is indeed protected then he should have no reason to hide his identity."
Nope they have no reason to hide their identity at all, except maybe:
-fear of being killed by the King of England(Founders of America/Federalist Papers) -being beaten for voting "wrong" (Oh, thats why its anonymous ballot, silly me!) -losing my job, and the ability to support myself for whistle blowing on Enron etc. -Speaking out against pedophile teachers / priests / family members who threaten hurt, harm & reprisal (Oh look how ironic, Freenet is helping the children now!)
Anonymous speech is NECESSARY for freedom of speech.
Seeing how you like to use anonymous coward, I think freenet fits your style quite well;).
Anyway, if you want a C implementation why not do it yourself? It's opensource, so get cracking. And also look up "Entropy" + Freenet i think its also an open source C version of Freenet.
There is more and more content being put on. Several people are uploading many books and content trying to make an online Freenet Public Library.
Also Freenet can compliment ordinary websites. If you have to host a large file, or other files mp3s etc, on say a geocities website with limited bandwidth why not link the files via freenet? Its like your own unlimited hard drive!
Its a good program, download it now and insert content and help it grow.
I propose that we build a digital library of all recorded works: music,
films, books, etc. and put it on Freenet [freenetproject.org]
Yes, I have also been thinking about creating a digital archive for all
information. Freenet seems the logical choice since we would need a process that
is decentralized, and not subject to threats by organization like government or
the RIAA.
The problem with Freenet though is that content tends to slide off of it from
non-use, if it is to be a library or archive it would need to be more permanent,
or at least a way to keep track of what is archived and what is not.
Are there any professional librarians out there? It can get complicated trying
to organize something of this size. And there is no reason why we cannot lobby
congress to reduce copyright at the same time as building this.
Everyone is griping about how long copyright is, instead lets lobby congress
to reduce the length back towards the origional 28 years.
What congress can do, it can undo. All that is needed is a little pressure. In
fact there is a large lobby group that already exists in trying to reduce the
copyright period to 50 years, unless the owners pays $1 at:
The best mirror technique that slashdot editors could use would be to use Freenet. It would cost nothing in bandwidth for Slashdot to mirror the content, and would be free advertisement for Freenet.
Up the Mod of the parent since it is entirely correct.
They did not "blackmail", as the last Slashdot article ad-libbed in its summary, Microsoft but gave them every opportunity to cooperate in creating a signed Linux loader.
As well the released code by X-Free does not allow you to pirate games. (Although by modifying their release and using their same technique it could be.)
As well it must be remembered that there is no EULA for hardware, we are freely able to use hardware we bought anyway we choose to. As well, people are legally able to reverse engineer the hardware, much the same way that other game consoles (NES, SNES, N64, PSX) were reverse engineered to create emulators like BLEEM.
P.S. Remember that it is likely the computer you are using now (IBM-CLONE) would not be here without the work of people reverse engineering the original IBM desktop computers.
"One could argue whether rigging the machines is rational"
The whole point of the Tragedy of the commons is that it occurs when *rational choice* leads to a nasty outcome. (i.e. it is in the farmer's interest to let his cattle feed extra, thinking everyone else will abide by the rules; but in fact everyone cheats and the common resource is depleated (nasty outcome)).
If they are acting irrational, then that is something other then a tragedy of commons situation, probably best described as them acting like cheating assholes;)
Tragedy of the Commons a.k.a the free rider problem, is indeed a subset of the prisoners' dilemma problem, both are one in the same in that they are the brand of game in which rational choice leads to a nasty equilbrium.
There is always a choice to 'cheat' in prisoner's dilemma / Tragedy of the Commons, wither to rat on your friend, or choose to let your cattle graze longer. The problem is that nasty outcomes occure when everyone chooses to cheat.
As well the prisoner's dilemma is a brand of game, not limited to the prisoner's dilemma example per say. Examples of 'prisoner's dilemma' include running red lights (If am the only one to do so, its ok, if everyone does, nasty out come), littering, etc.
Why is the title 'Tragedy of the Commons" for your post? The tragedy of the commons is based on a prisoner's dilemma for a common resource, i.e. each farmer 'cheating' by allowing their cattle to graze on a shared, *common*, field more then is agreed upon.
Its a term used when rational choice goes wrong, not a generic term for 'bad';).
"For each child in a single picture, how many more are hurt by it propagating along the internet and encouraging more abuse?"
For each picture, how many children are not molested because the person satisifies themselves on the picture, instead of seeking out some child?
For true pedofiles (thoes that are exclusively attracted to prepubesent children) the only outlit that exists for their sexual tension is children or pictures of them, and given that choice I have no doubt that most would prefer the children NOT be harmed, the pictures viewed.
*This all presupposes that sexual activity harms children (what age range?) which may or may not be true.
Child pornography may be self a reinforcing cycle creating more demand for child pornography (pictures) but I propose that pictures are not *the problem*
The problem is the harming of children. Children maybe harmed *less* if the seekers of child pornography fufill/satiate their need by masturbaiting/fantasy with pictures so they *Don't" have to seek out children in real life. Of course this all presupposes that sexual activity harms children, which may or may not be true.
What you said is wrong: taxes do not have '1' purpose: to generate revenue. Taxes also allow a marginal social cost (like pollution, health effects of smoking etc.) to be incorporated into the price of a good. This 'internalization of an externality' though tax is called a Pigouvian tax, or corrective tax.
The tax is <b>not</b> suppose to reduce the smoking etc. to zero. It merely raises the cost of using the good to reflect the marginal damage done.
Why is this good? The overall benefit of society is raised, as those who consume a good now pay the full costs (to health care as in smoking, or pollution) of consuming it. The quantity of a consuming the bad good is thus reduced to the point where the benefits = the costs, (never to zero).
Economists use this same idea to reduce the social cost of monopolists by taxing their profits.
In conclusion taxes are a powerful fiscal tool with many uses (revenue, reducing the social cost, correcting for monopolist behaviour, and more).
(The other message didnt format right because I put it as html >:) )
What you said is wrong: taxes do not have '1' purpose: to generate revenue. Taxes also allow a marginal social cost (like pollution, health effects of smoking etc.) to be incorporated into the price of a good. This 'internalization of an externality' though tax is called a Pigouvian tax, or corrective tax.
The tax is not suppose to reduce the smoking etc. to zero. It merely raises the cost of using the good to reflect the marginal damage done.
Why is this good? The overall benefit of society is raised, as those who consume a good now pay the full costs (to health care as in smoking, or pollution) of consuming it. The quantity of a consuming the bad good is thus reduced to the point where the benefits = the costs, (never to zero).
Economists use this same idea to reduce the social cost of monopolists by taxing their profits.
In conclusion taxes are a powerful fiscal tool with many uses (revenue, reducing the social cost, correcting for monopolist behaviour, and more).
Famatra
Slashdot Mirror
I've downloaded lots of movies and stuff off it, If I had to guess i'd say 1.5 gig.
I find the latest versions are slow lately, but getting files off of it is possible.
In case you did not hear, there is a P2P way to trade anonymously called freenet:
n load
http://freenet.sourceforge.net/index.php?page=dow
There isn't much content because it's fairly new, but with a little help a few uploads it could be come a very good trading network.
Yes, what do people expect some magical network that gives you stuff for free?
Freenet is only as good as the nodes that connect to it. What it needs is people to use perminant nodes, with high bandwidth and better computers. If you have one, connect and support freedom of speech.
Eventually you will have to download Freenet anyway, so might as well download it now and help it improve (often new improvements occur weekly) since do you think the likes of the RIAA or Government will give up easily?
A better way of showing how American government works is by voting these two idiots out of office in the next election.
People from all over the USA, not just in the two states they are in, should do campaigns (via email, door to door, etc.) to get them out, and hopefully somemone better in.
Mod Parent UP!
Freenet is an insurance policy against government to ensure freedom of speach is here to last.
The only cost of this insurance is to download it for free. Its a bargain.
"Should a neighbor be allowed to amplify his voice outside my house and recite pornography at 120 db without restriction?"
Thats the great thing about Freenet, content that is not requested is quickly repleced by content that is in demand.
I disagree with what you have to say but will fight to the death to protect your right to say it.
-Voltaire
"If the individual is indeed protected then he should have no reason to hide his identity."
Nope they have no reason to hide their identity at all, except maybe:
-fear of being killed by the King of England(Founders of America/Federalist Papers)
-being beaten for voting "wrong" (Oh, thats why its anonymous ballot, silly me!)
-losing my job, and the ability to support myself for whistle blowing on Enron etc.
-Speaking out against pedophile teachers / priests / family members who threaten hurt, harm & reprisal (Oh look how ironic, Freenet is helping the children now!)
Anonymous speech is NECESSARY for freedom of speech.
Seeing how you like to use anonymous coward, I think freenet fits your style quite well ;).
Anyway, if you want a C implementation why not do it yourself? It's opensource, so get cracking. And also look up "Entropy" + Freenet i think its also an open source C version of Freenet.
There is more and more content being put on. Several people are uploading many books and content trying to make an online Freenet Public Library.
Also Freenet can compliment ordinary websites. If you have to host a large file, or other files mp3s etc, on say a geocities website with limited bandwidth why not link the files via freenet? Its like your own unlimited hard drive!
Its a good program, download it now and insert content and help it grow.
You need to get your mind out of the gutter, only you would equate sitting for long periods of time with gay sex ;).
"Since these dorks are selling things that don't actually exist"
God i hate when people say this. What are you paying for when you goto the theater, other then the privledge of a sore ass?
Whether 'codes' on a server, memories or services, if purchasing something makes that person happy, then let them do it.
I propose that we build a digital library of all recorded works: music, films, books, etc. and put it on Freenet [freenetproject.org]
Yes, I have also been thinking about creating a digital archive for all information. Freenet seems the logical choice since we would need a process that is decentralized, and not subject to threats by organization like government or the RIAA.
The problem with Freenet though is that content tends to slide off of it from non-use, if it is to be a library or archive it would need to be more permanent, or at least a way to keep track of what is archived and what is not.
Are there any professional librarians out there? It can get complicated trying to organize something of this size. And there is no reason why we cannot lobby congress to reduce copyright at the same time as building this.
Everyone is griping about how long copyright is, instead lets lobby congress to reduce the length back towards the origional 28 years.
What congress can do, it can undo. All that is needed is a little pressure. In fact there is a large lobby group that already exists in trying to reduce the copyright period to 50 years, unless the owners pays $1 at:
http://eldred.cc/
So lend your support to it.
"Read Stallman's works"
;).
Does anyone have any links to some of the stuff he published?
It would be ironic that for a person who thinks copyright is immoral you had to buy his book to read his arguement
The best mirror technique that slashdot editors could use would be to use Freenet. It would cost nothing in bandwidth for Slashdot to mirror the content, and would be free advertisement for Freenet.
Up the Mod of the parent since it is entirely correct.
They did not "blackmail", as the last Slashdot article ad-libbed in its summary, Microsoft but gave them every opportunity to cooperate in creating a signed Linux loader.
As well the released code by X-Free does not allow you to pirate games. (Although by modifying their release and using their same technique it could be.)
As well it must be remembered that there is no EULA for hardware, we are freely able to use hardware we bought anyway we choose to. As well, people are legally able to reverse engineer the hardware, much the same way that other game consoles (NES, SNES, N64, PSX) were reverse engineered to create emulators like BLEEM.
P.S. Remember that it is likely the computer you are using now (IBM-CLONE) would not be here without the work of people reverse engineering the original IBM desktop computers.
"One could argue whether rigging the machines is rational"
;)
The whole point of the Tragedy of the commons is that it occurs when *rational choice* leads to a nasty outcome. (i.e. it is in the farmer's interest to let his cattle feed extra, thinking everyone else will abide by the rules; but in fact everyone cheats and the common resource is depleated (nasty outcome)).
If they are acting irrational, then that is something other then a tragedy of commons situation, probably best described as them acting like cheating assholes
Tragedy of the Commons a.k.a the free rider problem, is indeed a subset of the prisoners' dilemma problem, both are one in the same in that they are the brand of game in which rational choice leads to a nasty equilbrium.
There is always a choice to 'cheat' in prisoner's dilemma / Tragedy of the Commons, wither to rat on your friend, or choose to let your cattle graze longer. The problem is that nasty outcomes occure when everyone chooses to cheat.
As well the prisoner's dilemma is a brand of game, not limited to the prisoner's dilemma example per say. Examples of 'prisoner's dilemma' include running red lights (If am the only one to do so, its ok, if everyone does, nasty out come), littering, etc.
Why is the title 'Tragedy of the Commons" for your post? The tragedy of the commons is based on a prisoner's dilemma for a common resource, i.e. each farmer 'cheating' by allowing their cattle to graze on a shared, *common*, field more then is agreed upon.
;).
Its a term used when rational choice goes wrong, not a generic term for 'bad'
"For each child in a single picture, how many more are hurt by it propagating along the internet and encouraging more abuse?"
For each picture, how many children are not molested because the person satisifies themselves on the picture, instead of seeking out some child?
For true pedofiles (thoes that are exclusively attracted to prepubesent children) the only outlit that exists for their sexual tension is children or pictures of them, and given that choice I have no doubt that most would prefer the children NOT be harmed, the pictures viewed.
*This all presupposes that sexual activity harms children (what age range?) which may or may not be true.
Child pornography may be self a reinforcing cycle creating more demand for child pornography (pictures) but I propose that pictures are not *the problem*
The problem is the harming of children. Children maybe harmed *less* if the seekers of child pornography fufill/satiate their need by masturbaiting/fantasy with pictures so they *Don't" have to seek out children in real life. Of course this all presupposes that sexual activity harms children, which may or may not be true.
What you said is wrong: taxes do not have '1' purpose: to generate revenue. Taxes also allow a marginal social cost (like pollution, health effects of smoking etc.) to be incorporated into the price of a good. This 'internalization of an externality' though tax is called a Pigouvian tax, or corrective tax.
The tax is <b>not</b> suppose to reduce the smoking etc. to zero. It merely raises the cost of using the good to reflect the marginal damage done.
Why is this good? The overall benefit of society is raised, as those who consume a good now pay the full costs (to health care as in smoking, or pollution) of consuming it. The quantity of a consuming the bad good is thus reduced to the point where the benefits = the costs, (never to zero).
Economists use this same idea to reduce the social cost of monopolists by taxing their profits.
In conclusion taxes are a powerful fiscal tool with many uses (revenue, reducing the social cost, correcting for monopolist behaviour, and more).
(The other message didnt format right because I put it as html >:) )
What you said is wrong: taxes do not have '1' purpose: to generate revenue. Taxes also allow a marginal social cost (like pollution, health effects of smoking etc.) to be incorporated into the price of a good. This 'internalization of an externality' though tax is called a Pigouvian tax, or corrective tax. The tax is not suppose to reduce the smoking etc. to zero. It merely raises the cost of using the good to reflect the marginal damage done. Why is this good? The overall benefit of society is raised, as those who consume a good now pay the full costs (to health care as in smoking, or pollution) of consuming it. The quantity of a consuming the bad good is thus reduced to the point where the benefits = the costs, (never to zero). Economists use this same idea to reduce the social cost of monopolists by taxing their profits. In conclusion taxes are a powerful fiscal tool with many uses (revenue, reducing the social cost, correcting for monopolist behaviour, and more). Famatra