On 03/06/2011 04:22 PM, Yannick wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean here. Thus I will put it as simple as I can : from my point of view, the project is not about "something that works", "efficiency", "open source", "business", etc. Of course this matter. But the core is "freedom". With means something appealing that works based upon freedom. Freedom is not "open source" or "business". [...] This is the reason why i promised to give money to the project, to pay development! Best regards, Yannick
Fabulous post! You've manage to illustrate a great point, and I -for one- completely agree. Adding to the list: DNS replacement (to truly revolutionize/free the net), and onion routing for much the same reasons. So while some things may be solvable with existing tech such as VPN-tunneling, the things we lack right now, things that cannot be glued in due to missing packets are:
* Mesh networking - I've suggested packaging netsukuku, but as pro-embedding crew pointed out, a much more lightweight equivalent is desirable, if indeed such an alternative exists. * Distributed DNS' replacement - I don't think we have any packages for this, but there have been suggestions as to what to use (Beehive+CoDoNS being the latest, but failing to show the code) * Distributed certificates - To keep our communications safe, a distributed certificates framework is necessary, such as MonkeySphere (I'm not sure anymore what the status of that project is anymore. Tom?).
As for onion routing, I2P isn't "Debian", but GNUNet is and I think it supports o.r.. It also solves non-internet web pages, distributed messaging and loads of other problems.
So much from me right now. I may start posting request bugs at some point, but let's first agree on what to use exactly (so packaging won't be in vain). Anyway, gotta run to Church now.
--Luka Marčetić _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
