Michael Mehrle wrote on 5/27/00 1:53 pm: >My BIG question is this: You >guys are probably fully >aware that Freenet will have >to battle the same problem >that new operating systems, >such as BeOS or Linux had to >face: If there are no >applications available, >acceptance will be difficult. >Now, one of the things that >has been clear to me from >the very beginning is that >Freenet could 'compete' side >by side with established >'protocols' such as >FTP/HTTP/Gopher, etc.. >Which also means that the >amount of applications that >make use of the Freenet >infrastructure could be >numerous. >I guess, what I am getting at >is: does the group have a >clear vision of how exactly >Freenet is going to be used? >Of course some of this might >be hard to predict, but there >should be some initial ideas >defining a few front-end >applications that take >advantage of Freenet's >capabilities. Would a Napster >like app be conceivable that >focuses merely on MP3s and >other audio files? (well, >duuh!) How about the >concept of distributed >backup? An application >similar to Copicat might in >turn give Freenet the >exposure (i.e. the amount of >nodes :) that you guys are >hoping for.
Here are a few quick ideas for what could be done with Freenet. Some of these are rehashes of previous discussions, but I think they're worth mentioning again. --DNS --CVS-like --Web browser integration (probably with Mozzila first, then others will follow suit) --Linux kernel module (kfreed?) --Buissness transactions (as are being discussed on the freenet-chat list) I don't think the problem will be a lack of a clear vision, just in keeping the protocal flexible enough to support new ideas. ----------- Go Ping Yourself _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
