On Feb 2, 2016 3:14 PM, "Matthew Toseland" <mj...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > > On 02/02/16 17:24, x...@freenetproject.org wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm the maintainer of Web of Trust [2] and Freetalk [3], which are the first > > systems which will likely be deployed as installed by default for purposes > > subject to what you proposed with PSKs. > > As I understand it, Sadao is interested primarily in writing his own > incompatible forums system with centralised moderation (i.e. the ability > to remove users), at least as a first step? > >
For implementation couldn't users just follow the WoT trust-list of the forum moderator? Or a custom WoT created by the forum "owner" that contains the list of custom WoT of each approved moderator? You don't need a full implementation of computing every trust list of every user against each other; just a trust-list of each moderator for each user seen posting to a forum. > > While I admittedly didn't take the time to fully understand all details PSKs, > > I think I can nevertheless speculate the following about their general > > concept: > > > > There are a lot of systems based on WoT already: Freetalk, Freemail, Sone, > > FlogHelper, WoTNS, Infocalypse, and the ones I forgot about at [1]. > > They share a common concept: If content is downloaded, it is downloaded from > > the very same person responsible for it. This is to allow WoT to fulfill its > > purpose of spam filtering by saying "person X is not trustworthy anymore" and > > causing the content to be deleted then. I.e. we know who is to blame for spam, > > so we can just delete his stuff. > > We still know who posted something with PSKs. That's why we need a new > key type: You can post if your key is signed by the owner's key (at > least in Sadao's original proposal). > > With PSKs, that principle wouldn't apply anymore, there would be many people > > who have access to one keyspace, there wouldn't just one person be to blame > > for spam. > > This is a very disruptive change to architecture and thus would likely not > > work with the existing foundation of all the existing WoT systems and cause > > their 'core' to have to be rewritten. > > So what I'm trying to say is: This would be *years* of work. > > I agree it would be a lot of work to adapt WoT to use PSKs. Mainly > because of the complexity of creating groups of identities, detecting > misuse of owner powers etc, all automatically. > > And we've already spent years on WoT-based systems and they still aren't > > finished to the point where we can ship them as default with the installer. > > So I am preferring to finish WoT and its client applications with their > > architecture as is, because the users want to finally see results. > > Rewriting everything for yet another half a decade without having any > > officially-installed-by-default forum system is not an option :( > > And especially: The bugtracker contains sufficient ideas to make WoT and the > > apps based on it scalable, so there doesn't seem to be a need to pull out the > > optimization which PSKs are just yet. It is a lot more complex than the known > > optimizations, since it requires throwing everything we have away. The known > > ones would just improve upon systems as they are, they don't require as much > > work. > > I don't see why it would require "throwing everything away". In any > case, Sadao is perfectly entitled to build his own forums system. But as > I've explained I don't have time to implement PSKs at the moment; maybe > he will be able to. Of course he could work on something else, and that > might be more productive, but if he wants to implement PSKs, that's a > good thing. > > Sorry. > > > > I'm nevertheless glad for your idea of PSKs,and it can for sure be an option > > some day. Just please not now. > > I'd rather wait for this until: > > 1) WoT and a few apps based on it are finished and deployed. > > 2) it turnes out in benchmarks that the simple optimizations did not help > > enough. > > > > Meanwhile, if you do want to contribute some code to Freenet, notice this: > > Nowadays, at [1], we've gathered a *huge* list of all known subprojects. This > > should be a good tool to find something to work on! :) > > Once you've found something, it would be nice if you could join us on Freenode > > IRC at #freenet. Most developer communication happens there. > > > > > > Greetings and thanks for your returning! :) > > > > > > [1] https://wiki.freenetproject.org/Projects > > [2] https://wiki.freenetproject.org/Web_of_Trust > > [3] https://wiki.freenetproject.org/Freetalk > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl@freenetproject.org > https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
