Matthew Toseland skrev: > On Wednesday 17 June 2009 09:54:18 Zero3 wrote: >> Matthew Toseland skrev: >>> On Tuesday 16 June 2009 21:53:09 Zero3 wrote: >>>> Matthew Toseland skrev: >>>>> On Sunday 14 June 2009 14:24:39 Zero3 wrote: >>>>>> a) On the front page of the website: A "What is Freenet?" teaser linking >>>>>> to the "What is Freenet?" page would be cool. Confusedly started to read >>>>>> the news item instead. (She should have spotted the "News" headline, but >>>>>> I agree on the teaser) >>>>> I think originally the reason for putting news on the main page was that >>>>> a lot of people check back on the website repeatedly, looking for new >>>>> stuff (i.e. news) ?: >>>>> >>>>> I agree we should have some basic explanation and link on the home page >>>>> though ... I am not quite sure whether just copying the first para from >>>>> "What is Freenet" as Dieppe has done is sufficient? >>>>> >>>>> "Freenet is free software which lets you publish and obtain information >>>>> on the Internet without fear of censorship. To achieve this freedom, the >>>>> network is entirely decentralized and publishers and consumers of >>>>> information are anonymous. Without anonymity there can never be true >>>>> freedom of speech, and without decentralization the network will be >>>>> vulnerable to attack." >>>>> >>>>> Followed by a link to learn more, a download link and news. >>>>> >>>>> Is this sufficiently comprehensible to newbies? I guess so, but it >>>>> doesn't really answer the question! >>>> I think it's quite good actually! I think "Without anonymity there can >>>> never be true freedom of speech") is a bit subjective though. >>> Alternatives? Clearly anonymity is a direct consequence of the overriding >>> goal of thwarting censorship. >> Ala "The anonymity of Freenet makes true freedom of speech possible" > > Freenet is free software which lets you anonymously share files, browse and > publish "freesites" (web sites accessible only through Freenet) and chat on > forums, without fear of censorship. Freenet is decentralised to make it less > vulnerable to attack. > > Or even: > > Freenet is free software which lets you anonymously share files, browse and > publish "freesites" (web sites accessible only through Freenet) and chat on > forums, without fear of censorship. Freenet is decentralised to make it less > vulnerable to attack, and if used in "darknet" mode, where users only connect > to their friends, is very difficult to detect. > > ???
Sounds better to me. >>>>>> Very annoying to be asked to install a second >>>>>> browser. In this case, a third (using FF with IE as backup. And user is >>>>>> asked not to use IE). More FUD about history leaks. >>>>> FUD stands for Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Unfortunately, the warnings >>>>> about browser history stealing are factually true. Perhaps there is an >>>>> argument for not naming such attacks if this intimidates people? Is the >>>>> problem with IE important? There are possibilities for working around it, >>>>> there has never been much enthusiasm for implementing them (even from ian >>>>> who tends to be usability oriented). >>>> Exactly. The user is fears the consequences of history leaks and is >>>> uncertain what he ought to do, and thereby doubts his security and >>>> privacy using Freenet. >>> He knows what he needs to do - use a separate browser. Don't we make that >>> clear? It may be annoying but it is clear, no? >> It is indeed very clear, but as you say, also damn annoying. If >> possible, I think we should avoid annoying the user. > > Well, any suggestions you may have... afaics the best option on windows is to > run Chrome in incognito mode, and tell the wizard not to show the warning. > But in that case we need to warn the user if they ever use another browser - > and we can't tell the difference between Chrome in incognito mode and Chrome > not in incognito mode, so I think we should display the warning anyway, we > just need to rewrite it a bit for the case where we are using Chrome in > incognito mode: > > "You must always use a browser with incognito mode for Freenet! > > You are currently using Freenet through Chrome in incognito mode. This should > be safe. You should always access Freenet using Chrome in incognito mode, or > through a browser you do not using for normal web browsing. The Browse > Freenet link on the start menu should use Chrome in incognito mode, and so > should be safe. Most browsers will work well with Freenet, except for > Internet Explorer. > > Click here to continue." > > ??? I don't think we should display a warning when the user is browsing in incognito mode. When the user is not (or we don't know for sure), we could do it. - Zero3 _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
