> >It does create the problem that if people start passing around > >www.xxx.free URLs then these can only be used with Freeweb. Freeweb > >should probably just interpret http://localhost:8081/ requests through > >the proxy, it isn't as pretty, but at least it doesn't drive people away > >from an existing cross-platform standard. > > There's no reason why www.xxx.free can't work as a cross-platform standard. >
It would mean writing code for every platform. FreeWeb is just for Windows now, right? Freenet is for sending and receiving encrypted data. Get a grip. Grandma doesn't need to send secure e-birthday cards today and I doubt she will in 10 years. And who the hell would want to explain to Grandma how to configure her proxy? > Who really gives a fuck that KatieSoft > loyalists would have to switch to one of the other browsers while browsing > Freenet? KayieSoft loyalists? > And are you saying that setting up a browser to use external proxies is > harder than mastering the Freenet 'alphabet soup' URIs? > You have to give extra verbage when you put a freenet key in a web document. Even if you have a href='freenet://scoobiedoo.free' you still have to have a paragraph explaining that they need to download and install Freenet, download and install FreeWeb or one of the FreeWeb clones (that don't exist) for every OS, and then how to configure their proxy. Repeat after me: Freenet is not the WWW Freenet is not the WWW Freenet is not the WWW Freenet is not the WWW People who want security will use MSK/SSK. People who don't need it will use Windows and FreeWeb or more likely a web server. If someone really needs encryption they will take the extra time to do it right. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
