On 02/12/15 21:40, Matthew Toseland wrote: > There's one more way to look at this: > > The global network, "Freenet" as an entity, is our shop front. The real > business in the medium term is helping existing communities and > organisations to build their own, disconnected darknets. > > This might have positive consequences for funding - working more > directly with people who can use Freenet, or with people who provide > funding related to such things. It might work around some of the > political difficulties even - what's on your darknet is up to your > users. It might result in faster deployment, and larger darknet pockets > - seed communities from which it can grow. It might make invites to > specific community darknets valuable, which is potentially a good thing > for growth. It would give us a really convincing answer to "opennet is > busted, why should we take you seriously?". And the long term plan would > still be to connect up most of the individual darknets to a global network. > > Thoughts?
There are some technical consequences. Apart from the badly needed enhancements to darknet usability and performance, we'd also need to look into sorting out the problems with small darknets. Most of the organisational branding etc can be run through darknet features e.g. including custom bookmarks in an invitation bundle. However we might want to allow some sort of network ID too. There are a few other related issues e.g. should we search the local darknet before going out onto opennet, possibly on the level of whole files. But really it's a different way of looking at growth.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
