On Saturday 10 May 2008 20:53, Evan Daniel wrote: > On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Ian Clarke <ian.clarke at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ian is of the view that this should be a separate application based on similar > >> principles to Freenet. I'm not. We agree that there are some significant > >> issues to deal with. I am of the view that these networks are mutually > >> complementary and therefore should talk to each other > > > > I think the use-cases are too different for these to be part of the > > same application. > > IMHO, there's another interesting use-case. If I have a friend or two > I see daily at work or similar, and we swap 8GB memory cards, that > represents more bw than my cable modem uplink! (And the cost of a > memory card is lower than 1 month's subscription, provided it gets > swapped most days.) There's an interesting hybrid option here -- for > large queued downloads, requests go over the network link, but > responses go over sneakernet.
Agreed. > > I think flood routing inserts opportunistically is a good idea -- > there's no point in sending out a memory card less than full, and > routed requests / inserts may well not be enough to fill it. Depends on the outgoing, and storage, capacity of the receiving device. > > One interesting case is Cuba -- there's an operational sneakernet > there already: > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/world/americas/06cuba.html?ex=1362546000&en=eff6155b2c2d280d&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink > Currently it's basically manually flood routed, but I imagine there > would be significant demand for proper freenet routing to distribute > entertainment; everyone wants to see the latest news media, but > perhaps not the entertainment stuff depending how much there is. Right: Broadcast is much like TV channels, Freenet offers the web. Admittedly a high latency web, but this is acceptable for filesharing, people are used to waiting for stuff to download, and if it's not physically possible to get either Freenet over UDP or the web (in some cases not even a censored version, such as Cuba), it's a viable and useful alternative. One useful metaphor is the old offline browsing systems. A form of these is being set up in the third world - a guy cycles into a town with a disk, unloads it to the local computer terminal. People browse the stuff on the terminal, and queue requests for stuff that isn't in the cache. Then he comes back, gets the requests, downloads them (along with links to some depth), and returns with the requested data. When users log in, they'll get a page showing what they wanted to see has been downloaded. This is acceptable and useful option if real-time access isn't feasible (satellite internet access is *expensive*). > There may also be significant numbers of local wifi hops available > that aren't boardly connected (pure speculation on my part), so > switching back and forth between regular Freenet links and sneakernet > links could be useful. Right. > Also, in small communities where there's > strong motivation and short geographical distances, you may well find > the motivation sufficient to produce latencies of a couple hours, not > a day or so, at least in some cases. Well, the more people go out of their way to circumvent the authorities, the more dangerous it is for them. > > I have visions of Neo from The Matrix, sitting in a darkened apartment > and acting as clandestine data broker... > > Evan Daniel -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080512/dfe42bf5/attachment.pgp>
