On 28/08/16 19:23, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On 02/08/16 23:47, [email protected] wrote: >> Hereby we begin the 3rd stage of the financial allocation poll. >> >> You may participate by filling your votes in to this spreadsheet and >> mailing it back: >> https://github.com/xor-freenet/freenet-money-poll/archive/2016-stage3.zip >> >> It has been created with LibreOffice but may hopefully as >> well work with OpenOffice and any Microsoft Office version greater than or >> equal to 2007 SP2. >> >> With complex file formats like spreadsheets, it may be possible that private >> data such for example as your username or hostname leaks into the file. If >> you are concerned about that, you can: >> 1. Open the ODS file with a ZIP tool and review the plain text files it >> actually consists of. >> 2. Send back a CSV file instead. CSV is a plain text >> file format so you can review it with any text editor. For LibreOffice, >> instructions on how to export a CSV can be found at: >> https://help.libreoffice.org/Calc/Importing_and_Exporting_CSV_Files >> >> As almost 3 months have passed since the DuckDuckGo donation, we would like >> to continue to the next stage quickly - so please vote within 1 week. >> >> Thank you! > I believe the voting was extended to today, so I attach my votes. > > I am currently somewhat detached from the project, partly due to legal > issues I am seeking to clarify, partly because I believe we have missed > our opportunity. But another may arise in a few decades' time and it's > still worth trying to build something. > > As I have mentioned in another thread, many of the suggestions are > technically illiterate, some are already accomplished, and the relative > sizes vary enormously. Asking us not to take into account the technical > difficulty of each task when prioritizing arguably makes it more > difficult rather than less difficult. E.g. search is a major research > project - but approximations that are usable for limited sizes, e.g. for > sub-communities within Freenet, are much more feasible. > > Plus tasks overlap or appear in multiple categories... But I was busy > when this was being discussed... My point is take my answers with a > large pinch of salt as you would anyone else's. Right now I'm not > contributing, though I hope to do so in future. Also please don't stick > rigidly to the over-precise descriptions of the tasks, very often a > better way to do it is already on the bug tracker! > > There are also several important missing points: There's lots we could > do on performance (e.g. bloom filter sharing and equivalents), and other > stuff, e.g. deploying ArneBab's fix for the fundamental security issues > in darknet. > > In particular there's lots of code that just hasn't been merged, or that > needs finishing. For example, what's Icicle? Yet another mobile app to > make darknet connections easier? How many does that make now? Are either > of them usable? Do either of them have a reasonable security model? > Personally I dislike the idea of using texts to set up connections - > bumping is much preferable. So I've given that one 0. But we DO need to > get this sorted out somehow. Yet another example is FOAF - it's not just > about *finding* friends, it's about darknet performance, connectivity > for invites, *and* finding friends... All the stuff on FOAF and invites > is on the bug tracker in great detail. > > I also disagree with the implications of the language-related > suggestions. Sure, we always need to make things clearer. But we can't > entirely avoid jargon. Twitter and Facebook have lots of jargon. Jargon > isn't necessarily a bad thing per se. Of course you need to be careful > with it - define it, but don't force people to look stuff up! > > Fewer words is not always clearer. And unfortunately one of Freenet's > fundamental problems is the way its developers and its users see the > world are irreconcilably different. This makes things like bootstrapping > hard. But we've worked on that over the years and come up with > reasonable compromises; there is space to do useful stuff. > > Re legal stuff, do we know that "some users were completely innocent"? > If there is a genuine issue here we can probably get help for free by > working with people like EFF... > > My two cents, in a rather scattered "everything" form to offset some > other people's contributions... :) > > Hope it works out! One point about protocol here:
Clearly we can't *do* "everything" for $20K. Ultimately if there is no clear victor, somebody will have to choose a set of stuff for our paid developer(s) to work on, based on the votes but also informed by some estimate of difficulty. I guess that's the next stage...
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
