Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 August 2008 20:57, Ian Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Matthew Toseland
>> <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 19 August 2008 16:17, Ian Clarke wrote:
>>>> Incidentally, where did the '5 friend' requirement come from.
>>>>
>>>> Is opennet more secure than having 4 friends?
>>> Opennet is probably more secure than having only 1 friend ... unless you
> are
>>> reasonably confident that they are not evil.
>>>
>>> Five friends is just a guesstimate for adequate performance and
> connectivity.
>> So why require it? By requiring it, you are forcing people with only
>> 4 friends to either use opennet, or not use Freenet.
>
> Okay, so if we don't require it, we need to change the wording slightly.
> Suggestions?
>
> I intend to access information that could get me arrested, imprisoned,
> or worse. I am worried about my government or ISP blocking Freenet.
> I understand that Freenet is experimental and *cannot* ensure security
> against certain known attacks, but I accept the risks compared to the
> alternatives. Freenet will only connect to your friends nodes, so **you
> must have friends using Freenet already, and connect to them** (performance
> will be very poor if there are fewer than 5).
This would sound clear enough.
Also i haven't used freenet installer in a long time, is there a link to FAQ
somewhere there?
- Volodya
--
http://freedom.libsyn.com/ Echo of Freedom, Radical Podcast
http://eng.anarchopedia.org/ Anarchopedia, A Free Knowledge Portal
http://freenetproject.org/ The Free Network project
"None of us are free until all of us are free." ~ Mihail Bakunin
