On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 09:45:48AM +0200, Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote: > > > > Darknet is more secure than opennet. We should make this as clear as > > possible. Obviously we should make the warning as concise as possible; > > we could shrink the above down to "Warning: Opennet mode detected", and > > have a hyperlink to a fuller explanation. > > For sure we need the warning but still: something I've not understood > in the logic: Why enabling the opennet by default ?
Because, by your own statistics, right now most people joining freenet 0.7 don't bother to get refs and get connected to the darknet; it's too much work, and it involves connecting to people they don't trust, since they discovered freenet through slashdot, or a magazine article, or some other impersonal source. > > Providing an hybridnet is something, making it the default is an other > one. > > I'm just not convinced we need opennet and even less convinced that we > should let it be the default behaviour. It's no use if it's not the default behaviour. The whole point is that freenet can only grow rapidly if users can install it and have it working quickly. > > NextGen$ -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060711/7c0bf0ea/attachment.pgp>
