>>>>> "GAB" == Gregory Alan Bolcer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
GAB> Standard multi-person dilemma, death and taxes (allocation),
GAB> & all that. 8-) One of the social things that p2p uncovered
GAB> is that people have a strong sense of local ownership of
GAB> their own data (which is under their own control). Freenet
GAB> is giving up control of some portion of your local resources.
GAB> The phone company takes place out there. If you can break
GAB> the conceptual barrier, then you've got a real argument.
I guess I don't see why this is an issue. We have had tons of
downloads of Freenet, and thousands of installed nodes.
It seems like we don't have to make this case, in other words. People
are voting with their feet, and they seem to be willing to make the
contribution of resources to Freenet in exchange for the benefits of
anonymity.
Of course, if someone wants to point out that "it'll never work," more
power to them. They might also want to argue against the possibility
of heavier-than-air flight. Existence proof, etc.
~Mr. Bad
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. Bad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/
freenet:MSK@SSK@u1AntQcZ81Y4c2tJKd1M87cZvPoQAge/pigdog+journal//
"Cetere, Kartago estas detruenda."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
