Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids

[Ian Clarke]

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:57 PM,  wrote:

> Thanks for that, Joel.  The "Taxed Enough Already" (TEA) party movement has
> been the unfortunate victim of a very successful smear campaign - partly
> because it's managed to attract a handful of the wrong sorts of people, but
> mostly because it's become a very real threat to the Washington
> establishment.  We "scum" are Freenet's best hope - as you can see, the
> current, supposedly "tech-savvy" U.S. political administration hasn't lived
> up to your expectations.
>

I certainly don't think the tea party are scum, I just think that a lot of
libertarians, who think that the tea party is about libertarianism, are
going to get a rude awakening once they get into power, just as they did
when the Republicans took over the house and congress in the mid-90s.

Also, a lot of their positions are contradictory.  They claim they oppose
the deficit, yet they want a tax cut for people who don't need it, paid for
by increasing the deficit.  They oppose spending, yet supported the Bush tax
cuts and the Iraq war, which together dwarf the combined effect of the
recovery measures, tarp, and the economic downturn, in terms of their impact
on the deficit.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
CEO, SenseArray
Email: i...@sensearray.com
Ph: +1 512 422 3588
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [freenet-chat] [freenet-dev] US government tries to bring back the Clipper Chip - on steroids

[Ian Clarke]

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Joel C. Salomon wrote:

> On 09/28/2010 08:13 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > Legislation will be introduced in the new year by the obama
> administration to (amongst other things) force peer to peer software
> developers to redesign their systems to allow intercept warrants to be
> serviced.
> 
> > The Tea Party scum use the constitution in their rhetoric but are
> unlikely to stand against intercept powers to beat terrorists etc.
>
> We scum of the TEA Party are concerned about *all* unconstitutional
> extensions of Federal power; in fact I learned about this legislation
> first from a TEA Party news alert.
>

So far as I can tell the "tea party" is all things to all people, even when
it is contradictory.  Some of them want it to be about libertarianism, for
some its about opposing the "gay agenda", etc etc.  The only thing that
seems to unite them is that they all hate Obama, they are almost all
republicans or republican-leaning, and 99.9% of them are white.


> Repeat after me, "Four legs good, two legs bad."
>

Yeah, Obama is a socialist because he implemented the healthcare plan that
the GOP came up with in the 90s.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
CEO, SenseArray
Email: i...@sensearray.com
Ph: +1 512 422 3588
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [freenet-chat] Add frost page to Freenet Default Bookmarks

[Ian Clarke]

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Matthew Toseland  wrote:

>  Freetalk will be integrated in the node soon (how soon nobody knows),


What is the deal with this, it seemed perfectly functional months ago...?

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
CEO, SenseArray
Email: i...@sensearray.com
Ph: +1 512 422 3588
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

[freenet-chat] Freenet 0.7RC1 announcements on user-generated news websites

[Ian Clarke]

I've submitted an announcement to Reddit and Digg - please vote, etc.

Reddit:
  http://reddit.com/info/6e1ao/comments/

Digg:
  http://digg.com/software/Freenet_0_7_Release_Candidate_1_now_available

Ian.

-- 
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell: +1 512 422 3588
Skype: sanity
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Using algorithms from papers

[Ian Clarke]

On 12/12/06, toad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If we find an algorithm in a paper, can we use it in Freenet?

Of course we can.  The appropriate response to the threat of software
patents is political action, which has been relatively successful in
Europe, the response is not to cave into them pre-emptively.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] relation Freenet and Routing Indices

[Ian Clarke]

I would recommend that you look at http://freenetproject.org/ 
papers.html - you will find various papers describing our current  
approach, along with various previous ideas.  Pay particular  
attention to the second and third links on that page.


I have only glanced at the paper you mention, and while there are  
some conceptual similarities between what they describe and Freenet,  
it is not the same algorithm.


Kind regards,

Ian.

On 15 Nov 2006, at 01:44, Steven Castelein wrote:

I am doing some research on the Freenet project and especially on  
the algorithm Freenet uses. In some papers this algorithm is  
referenced as the 'Document Routing Model'. After some more  
research I found the paper 'Routing Indices For Peer-to-Peer  
Systems by Arturo Crespo and Hector Garcia-Molina, Proceedings of  
the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems  
in July 2002.


Citeseer link: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/crespo02routing.html
Paper in PDF: http://infolab.stanford.edu/~crespo/publications/ 
crespoa_ri.pdf


Does this paper describe the model that Freenet uses on a  
theoretical level? If not, what are the differences?


Best regards,

Steven Castelein


___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc.
phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Sun to GPL Java

[Ian Clarke]

http://tinyurl.com/ydelq5If true, this would definitely answer much of the criticism about Sun as it relates to free software.Ian.  		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  ___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Freenet on Newsnight

[Ian Clarke]

Freenet was just featured prominently on Newsnight, the BBC's flagship nightly news programme.  The show will be online until Monday, while it is you can watch it here:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/default.stmThe Freenet segment is right at the start.  Theo did a really great job of explaining the project (take it from me that it isn't easy when you only have a few seconds), and hopefully this will result in significant new interest in the project.Ian.  		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  ___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Anyone seen an article about Freenet in Dutch newsweekly Nieuwe Revu?

[Ian Clarke]

I have the article, if someone is willing to translate I can mail it to them.Ian.On 27 Sep 2006, at 17:41, Ian Clarke wrote:On 27 Sep 2006, at 11:06, Michael A. Kuijn wrote: On Wednesday 27 September 2006 18:41, Ian Clarke wrote: Apparently there was an article about Freenet in Dutch newsweeklyNieuwe Revu about a month ago, written by a journalist whoinfiltrated a child pornography ring on Freenet.  He interviewed mefor the article several months ago.Has anyone seen this, and can anyone provide an English translation? I haven't seen it, but I am sure I'll be able to look this up. It will be anhonour to translate it for you. I would really appreciate that.Kind regards,Ian.   		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  ___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Anyone seen an article about Freenet in Dutch newsweekly Nieuwe Revu?

[Ian Clarke]

On 27 Sep 2006, at 11:06, Michael A. Kuijn wrote:


On Wednesday 27 September 2006 18:41, Ian Clarke wrote:

Apparently there was an article about Freenet in Dutch newsweekly
Nieuwe Revu about a month ago, written by a journalist who
infiltrated a child pornography ring on Freenet.  He interviewed me
for the article several months ago.

Has anyone seen this, and can anyone provide an English translation?
I haven't seen it, but I am sure I'll be able to look this up. It  
will be an

honour to translate it for you.


I would really appreciate that.

Kind regards,

Ian.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Anyone seen an article about Freenet in Dutch newsweekly Nieuwe Revu?

[Ian Clarke]

Apparently there was an article about Freenet in Dutch newsweekly Nieuwe Revu about a month ago, written by a journalist who infiltrated a child pornography ring on Freenet.  He interviewed me for the article several months ago.Has anyone seen this, and can anyone provide an English translation?Ian.  		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  ___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] A potential patent threat to Freenet and other P2P networks

[Ian Clarke]

This patent purports to cover the rather obvious idea of "using  
substantially unique identifiers to identify data items, whereby  
identical data items have the same identifiers":


  http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5978791.html

It was filed in October 1997, and is owned by Altnet, who are  
currently using it to sue Streamcast (creators of Morpheus), and, if  
they prevail or of Streamcast caves, could conceivably attack other  
P2P networks, including Freenet:


  http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060815-7508.html

Now it is hard to believe that prior art wouldn't exist for such an  
obvious idea, claim one is a text book definition of a hash function  
which have been around for decades, claim 2 would seem to describe a  
hashtable, also a notion with clear prior art going back decades,  
claim 5 seems to describe the operation of a cache, and so on.


But then the claims discuss using this technique to retrieve things  
over a network.  Now, one might argue that simply applying a common  
computer science technique to a distributed situation is not novel (I  
don't believe you can get a valid patent simply by combining two  
other things you didn't invent), but it would be really useful to  
find some robust examples of requesting files by their hashes over a  
network that pre-date October 1997.


I have heard that the Xanadu project may have something in 1990, but  
haven't got any specific references.  Is anyone aware of anything  
concrete?


Ian.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Please keep this quiet for now

[Ian Clarke]

We won't be officially announcing until later today (PST), so please  
keep this quiet until we do (ie. hold off on those Digg and Slashdot  
story submissions).


John Gilmore, employee no. 5 at Sun Microsystems, co-founder of the  
EFF, and many other things, has generously donated $15,000 to the  
Freenet Project to support the ongoing development of the software.   
This virtually assures our ability to continue to employ Matthew for  
the next 6 months at least, and makes a nice change from the current  
situation where we have barely had enough to pay him from week to week.


My hope is that our existing donors will continue to donate, as that  
might even open up the possibility of employing someone else,  
although not such that it would jeopardize Matthew's employment.


We are currently working on the wording of the announcement, and we  
would welcome everyone's input - you can find the draft in the wiki:


  http://wiki.freenetproject.org/GilmoreDonationAnnouncement

Again, please hold off on the Diggs and the Slashdot announcements, I  
am waiting for feedback from a number of people on the draft  
announcement, including John Gilmore himself.


Ian.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Robots.txt

[Ian Clarke]

Oh, and email addresses (if we don't already).Ian.On 15 Aug 2006, at 12:43, Matthew Toseland wrote:On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:56:49AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: I don't see why not, its public. Okay cool lets do it. (My view is that as long as we expunge all IPaddresses, and make it clear in the channel topic that it is logged,then we're fine). Ian.On 12 Aug 2006, at 16:12, Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote: Hi,	Shall we let webcrawlers/searchengines index our irc logs ?NextGen$ -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.___chat mailing listchat@freenetproject.orgArchived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.generalUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chatOr mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Freenet merchandise

[Ian Clarke]

I have had some complaints that the merchandise in the Freenet store at http://www.cafepress.com/freenetproject aren't cool enough, t-shirts should be black etc etc.  If anyone would like to try their hand at some new stuff, please let me know.Ian.  		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  ___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Robots.txt

[Ian Clarke]

I don't see why not, its public.Ian.On 12 Aug 2006, at 16:12, Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:Hi,	Shall we let webcrawlers/searchengines index our irc logs ?NextGen$___chat mailing listchat@freenetproject.orgArchived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.generalUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chatOr mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Re: [Tech] Open-net

[Ian Clarke]

Opennet is a high priority, but there are a few things we must do first (such as sort out our load balancing issues, and decide on exactly how opennet should be implemented).Ian.On 8 Aug 2006, at 11:29, anonymous freenet user wrote:When will 'Open-net' be deployed?I would like very much to migrate to 0.7, but I cannot condone doing sountil 'open-net' is active and making a wider anonymity set operational.As it is, 0.7 is not sufficiently anonymous, If I start a node, get somerefs and start inserting content, it doesn't take a whole lot of rocketscience to figure out that new content is probably coming from the newnode.  Better by far to have open-net active, this makes it a LOT easierfor lots more people to join the 0.7 network and create a larger crowd toget lost in.___Tech mailing listTech@freenetproject.orghttp://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech   		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  ___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Skype cracked

[Ian Clarke]

http://www.skype.com/security/files/2005-031%20security%20evaluation.pdfOn 14 Jul 2006, at 15:20, Matthew Toseland wrote:Is there any evidence of reasonable crypto in skype? I have heard thatit is encrypted, but no other VOIP is...?On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 12:14:43AM +0200, Magnus Eriksson wrote: I thought this might be interesting:Chinese Company: Skype Protocol Crackedhttp://www.cio.com/blog_view.html?CID=22974 "The 10-person Chinese company, which has received venture capital funding, is planning to release in two weeks three software components based on the Skype protocol that would allow developers to create compatible applications ..." "By cracking the Skype protocol, the company claims it can also block Skype voice traffic ..."Original source:Skype Protocol Has Been Crackedhttp://www.voipwiki.com/blog/?p=16So.. "Software components that would allow developers to create compatible applications"Fantastic!  So we have great stego for Freenet.  And it might even be possible to bounce traffic off Skype nodes (or, Freenet nodes using that "component").But... "the company claims it can also block Skype voice traffic"We're screwed.  :-)  But I suppose it might be useful.  Another option, if nothing else.  And maybe I even can have a client that doesn't automatically report my whole social network to an easily subpoenaed server.MAgnus___chat mailing listchat@freenetproject.orgArchived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.generalUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chatOr mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.___chat mailing listchat@freenetproject.orgArchived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.generalUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chatOr mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   		 		Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. 		contact | [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog  

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Freenet Project status report - and request for your assistance

[Ian Clarke]

Hi all, time for a status update.

The pace of coding on Freenet has increased dramatically since the  
release of the 0.7 alpha. We now have an active group of core  
developers working with Matthew Toseland (our full-time dev), and a  
growing community of developers working on third-party applications  
through the Freenet Client Protocol. After the rather stagnant period  
before the decision to switch to a darknet model, Freenet is now more  
active and vibrant than it has ever been.


Current estimates put the size of the darknet between 300-400 nodes,  
not bad for a hard-to-use alpha release, and we are seeing an average  
of about 50 commits per week from developers. We have 4 Google Summer  
of Code projects working on everything from a new load-balancing  
mechanism, to a cross-platform file upload and download utility  
(called "Thaw"), and a flexible user-friendly installer.


We have also been thinking hard about how to minimize the inherent  
usability challenges posed by a darknet approach, and with this in  
mind, have implemented support for third party applications to add  
and remove darknet connections via FCP. This means we can do things  
like write IM plugins to make it very easy to establish connections  
to friends.


We will also be deploying "opennet" functionality, so that users who  
don't need the security offered by the darknet, can just start up a  
node and get going immediately, as with previous versions of Freenet,  
but this time with the benefits of NAT circumvention and a UDP-based  
transport.


On the more administrative side, Florent Daignière has been a big  
help, setting up a bug tracker (https://bugs.freenetproject.org/),  
and a variety of other tools to help streamline Freenet's development  
process.


Its not all good news though, despite the generosity of many of our  
users, donations to the project have been unable to keep-up with the  
$2300 per month (a meager salary for a software developer in the UK)  
needed by Matthew Toseland, and right now we are on the verge of not  
being able to continue to pay him - which would obviously be terrible  
for the project. In the past, users and supporters of the project  
have been extremely generous when we have asked them to help us out  
of a financial hole, and I am hoping that you can be similarly  
generous on this occasion.


With this in mind, I would ask that you visit our donations page on  
the website, it can be found at:


   http://freenetproject.org/donate.html

And please donate anything you can spare.

Many thanks,

Ian Clarke,
Freenet Project Coordinator.___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Scientology strikes again

[Ian Clarke]

On 24 Jun 2006, at 10:29, Josh Steiner wrote:

what was this?  it just redirects to http://www.scientology.org/


Taking a website critical of you, and redirecting it to your own  
website these guys have no sense of shame at their blatant  
censorship effort, but I guess believing in intergalactic aliens does  
weird things to your sense of right and wrong.


Ian.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] ideas for a freenet 'name server' framework

[Ian Clarke]

I think the fact that DNS has evolved into a primitive search engine  
(typing www.dictionary.com to find a dictionary website) was always  
rather ugly - and I'm not sure it is something we want to emulate.


Better to implement a proper search engine which can correctly  
address the issue of mapping information about what people want (a  
search query) to actual websites where they will find it.  I believe  
people are already working on this.


Ian.

On 15 Jun 2006, at 05:02, David McNab wrote:


Hi

I've been thinking about ways to get human-friendly, yet secure, URIs
under freenet.

(KSKs are nice, just a shame they're so easily subverted).

My thoughts so far are:

1) Users would trust one or more 'namesites'. For instance, if I have
confidence in Alice's 'namesite', I would stick in my ~/.freenames  
file

an entry:

alice freenet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/alice/0

2) If I want to browse a freesite, with the human-friendly URL of
http://falun-gong.free, my client would look in ~/.freenames, see the
entry for 'alice', then try alice's uri for 'falun-gong'.

3) If the 'alice' namesite has an entry for 'falun-gong', then the  
URI:


[EMAIL PROTECTED]/alice/0/falun-gong

should return the physical URI of the 'falun-gong' site I'm looking  
for,

which might be:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]/falun-gong/0

4) Alice might trust other namesites, so her namesite would have
a file '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/alice/0/.forward

which lists URIs for other namesites which Alice considers  
trustworthy.

So if Alice didn't have an entry for 'falun-gong', maybe one of the
namesites listed in her .forward file might.

So, how would this get used in practice?

One way I've thought of is to implement a basic name server for local
use only. This name server would have a very simple socket interface,
supporting commands like 'lookup' (look up a name), 'list' (list the
trusted namesites), 'add' (add a namesite), 'remove' (remove a  
namesite).


Then the last step is to write an http proxy over the top of fproxy
which simply follows the above method to translate human-readable URIs
such as 'http://falun-gong.free' to
'http://127.0.0.1:/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/falun-gong/0/index.html'

As for the service side, running a namesite would be very easy. It  
would
just be a freesite where the mapping from (say) foo.free is  
implemented

as a relative path /foo, which contains just the real freenet URI
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]/foo/0'.

An alternative, which would reduce the number of files on the  
freesite,

would be to list everything in one file, maybe '/.bulk'.

But before I launch into something like this, the question to ask is
whether others might see value in having human-readable yet secure and
(relatively) trustworthy URIs.

For me, I would see value, because I'm getting a bit tired of the
current URIs being so long that I can't see the file extension in my
browser address or status bars.

Anyway, your thoughts?

--
Kind regards
David

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]



___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Poll on anonymous P2P apps

[Ian Clarke]

We aren't doing too well so far:

http://board.planetpeer.de/index.php/topic,1730.0.html
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] ANN: PyFCP now ready for use

[Ian Clarke]

David, can you add a link to this in the Library Implementations  
section of this page:


  http://wiki.freenetproject.org/FreenetFCPSpec2Point0

Ian.

On 11 May 2006, at 23:54, David McNab wrote:



Hi Python hax0r5,

I've just checked into svn a whole new version of pyfcp, which  
should be

good enough for use in freenet client development.

Features:
 - very simple intuitive API
 - all primitives support synchronous, asynchronous and callback-based
   invocation
 - includes an XML-RPC server module, which exposes FCP primitives  
over

   XML-RPC
 - includes a 'sitemgr' module, very useful for command-line
   (or cron-based) freesite insertion
 - now with full API documentation

Todo:
 - implement support for persistent jobs

If you find bugs, please check your patches into svn. If you don't  
have
svn access, or if you're not confident to fix the bugs, give me a  
yell.


Cheers
David


___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]



___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Q: transient nodes and freesite insertions

[Ian Clarke]

On 11 May 2006, at 01:35, David McNab wrote:

I've got a cron job which, once a day:
 1. starts a transient freenet node
 2. lets the node 'settle' for 60 seconds
 3. does a round of freesite insertions
 4. sits for another 60 seconds
 5. shuts down the node

Given that the node has at least a couple of good connections to  
peers,

is this a safe setup?

In other words, will the transience of the node impact on the  
ability of

others to reach the inserted freesites? If so, then is there an amount
of time I should leave the node running after the freesite inserts  
which

will mitigate such impacts?

Thanks in advance for your replies


This should work fine - even if your peer doesn't have time to  
acquire a desirable location (and it probably won't in 60 seconds),  
the nodes it talks to probably will, so inserts should get routed  
correctly.


Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] my 0.7 feedback

[Ian Clarke]

That is nice to hear David, welcome back :-)

Ian.

On 10 May 2006, at 16:26, David McNab wrote:


Hi all,

I've been away from freenet for some time, largely due to the
frustration caused by Freenet's pathological unreliability in the
0.4,0.5 era as I was trying to get Freemail to work reliably.

In the last couple of weeks, I've been dabbling with 0.7, and have  
been

in the process of implementing pyfcp (a python library for clients to
access freenet via FCP), and development has taken a couple of  
orders of
magnitude less time and effort (and pain) compared to its  
counterpart on

0.4-0.6.

I want to say that with the new architecture of 0.7, I feel my  
energies

and enthusiasm have regenerated (after feeling burned out and
disillusioned with 0.4-0.6). So congratulations, lots of bouquets, and
lots of fine wine/malt whisky/sticky buds/funny mushrooms/etc to the
architects and developers.

In particular, some of the features I'm really enjoying are:

 - transparent splitfiles handling within the node - no more of this
   dragging the client through the entrails of this complicated  
process


 - FCP's 'ClientPutComplexDir', making freesite insertion an absolute
   breeze

 - the USK keytype, and its transparent management within the node.  
This
   rocks so goddam hard - no more tedious freesite insertion  
schedules,

   no more annoying metadata construction, no more sites dropping off
   if the author misses an insertion deadline

 - Metadata.ContentType - marvelously simple and to the point. In
   99.95% of cases, no more metadata than this is needed

 - fproxy's improvements, and ability to manage lots of stuff via
   the web interface

Guys, you've won me back as a client writer, and I'm sure you'll win
back a lot more people as word of 0.7's atonements gets out.

Cheers
David (aum)


___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]



___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] (amended) HOWTO: firefox 'freenet:' protocol handling

[Ian Clarke]

On 7 May 2006, at 18:04, David McNab wrote:

Ian Clarke wrote:

So websites that use this will only work with users that have Firefox
and have installed the plugin?

...

 Isn't it preferable to encourage people
to use the normal http://127.0.0.1:/ prefix?


Seems we've got two imperfect options:

1) Dump user into a sea of broken links if they choose not to have  
their

fproxy at 127.0.0.1:


In which case the user will have some idea of why they are getting  
broken links, as they will have made a conscious decision to change  
their fproxy address.



versus

2) Dump user into a sea of broken links if they choose not to use an
extensible open-source browser


Its not our job to punish the 90% of web users that don't agree with  
your preferred choice of web browser.  Worse, we would also be  
punishing those people that do agree with your choice of web browser,  
but who don't have the appropriate plugin.



Both scenarios suck, but IMHO the latter sucks a lot less.


Both scenarios are similar in terms of the poor user experience, the  
differentiator is which is more likely.  Going with freenet:-style  
urls is much more likely to lead to scenario 2 than sticking with our  
current approach is to lead to scenario 1.


Ian.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] (amended) HOWTO: firefox 'freenet:' protocol handling

[Ian Clarke]

This worries me, as it has worried me every time someone has  
suggested it (it is suggested about once every 6 months on average):


On 7 May 2006, at 14:48, David McNab wrote:

A 2-minute recipe for getting Firefox to handle 'freenet:'-style URLs,
so that mainstream web pages can link to freesite pages without  
worrying

about fproxy access specifics.


So websites that use this will only work with users that have Firefox  
and have installed the plugin?  Isn't it preferable to encourage  
people to use the normal http://127.0.0.1:/ prefix?  This will  
work with any web browser without any plugins, even if it isn't quite  
as pretty as using the "freenet:" prefix?


While we might gain the visual elegance of freenet:-style URL  
prefixes, we lose cross-browser compatibility, and the ability for  
people to link to pages on Freenet without special browser plugins.   
It really isn't worth it.


Ian.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Tagging on mailing lists

[Ian Clarke]

This makes a pretty persuasive argument for ditching the [freenet- 
devl] subject tags on mailing list emails:


  http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/qralston/writing/tagging-harmful/

If nobody can come up with a good argument against this, I suggest we  
follow its advice and remove the Subject tags.


Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Freenet code in Winny and Share

[Ian Clarke]

On 1 May 2006, at 06:40, Caco Patane wrote:


Look at this article were Freenet is named:
http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=1169

"Both Winny and Share use Freenet code to help obscure the link
between IP addresses and shared folders, offering a certain level of
anonymity."

It's about leaked data to a P2P network.

Cheers,


Someone should correct that, to the best of my knowledge, neither of  
these applications reuse Freenet code.


Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Visual Demo

[Ian Clarke]

I think this might be what you are referring to:

  http://freenetproject.org/papers/ccc/ccc-freenet-demo.tar.bz2

Note that it requires Java 1.5.  Usage is *not* self explanatory, but  
it is pretty simple, so make sure you read the README file.


Ian.

On 3 Apr 2006, at 04:58, Martin Ottehall wrote:

I've read about a visual demo of 0.7 and was wondering if there's a  
possibility I could get ahold of it and show to my teacher as I'm  
trying to test Freenet in a school project I'm doing about it.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Re: Ian clarke, self-proclaimed free-speech fan, censors criticism of the freenet-project

[Ian Clarke]

I was surprised to notice that Newsbyte hadn't continued his pathetic  
battle to use Wikipedia as a soapbox for his views, and then I  
noticed that my prediction came true and a Wikipedia editor had  
banned him for his activities on the Freenet article.  See [1].


Of course, Newsbyte, with his indestructible and grossly inflated  
sense of the value of his own opinions is  bound to accuse the  
Wikipedia editor of being a Freenet fanboy, as that is the only  
possible explanation for this that is compatible with his warped and  
self-aggrandizing world view.


Ian.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:195.144.64.17

On 10 Jan 2006, at 19:55, Newsbyte wrote:

Well...someone with Ians' nick, anyway, but I thought the title of  
this post
should reflect in the same way as that of Ians' about me. Equal  
treatement,

after all (no doubt he will be lecturing again about off-topic posts,
neglecting his same, earlier behaviour). And besides, I think there is
little doubt; feel free to deny it if it's not true/you, Ian.

As one can see on the wikipedia, a small group of freenet-fanboys  
there, and

probably Ian himself,  have consistently tried to censor any form of
criticism. Now, I myself am still fond of the freenet as a concept  
too, but
that doesn't mean I have to close my eyes for the things that go  
wrong, and
neither should anyone else, if they are really serious with helping  
the
project. But aparently, Ian and his cronies do not only not agree  
with the
criticism, they even don't want any mentionning that there *is*  
citicism on

the freenetproject.

Constantly new excuses are sought to justify the ongoing  
revertions, even
AFTER the agreement was reached that we would abide by the  
compromise a
wiki-admin had made with an edit. First, it was because it was  
posted by me;

but when somebody else posts it, it's to no avail anyway. Then, in the
interest of keeping the peace on the wikipedia, I agree with the  
decision of
a wiki-admin...but aparently, *I* am the only one considered to be  
bound to
it, and when a very watered-down wikiadmin-edit with the  
acknowledgement
that at least there IS criticism of the freenet-project, then  
suddenly no-1
else feels bothered by completely ignoring the agreement. When I  
revert to
that of the wikadmin-version, it is claimed there are no sources  
mentionned,
when I give a wikipage where the sources *are* mentionned, it is  
claimed

they are not notable, etc.

As one can see, a perfect catch-22; no criticism exists, because no  
sources
can be given, and when sources are given, then they are proclaimed  
to be of
trolls and lamenters and not notable, which means no sources have  
to be

reckoned with, which means the mentionning of the fact that there is
criticism can be deleted, so no critcism exists...

Thus even the simple fact that there *is* criticism is conveniently  
and
self-servingly kept out of the wikipedia-page, as if no such thing  
exists;
but in any pragmatic sense, it is clear it is just used by Ian and  
consorts
to let it appear if no such thing exists - completely in line whith  
his
continuous habbit of over-optimistic claims and mispresenting, in  
this case,
an article by making it less NPOV (which inherently happens, if you  
censor

criticism - a fact dictators well know, as Ian should know, seen his
purported 'free-speech in china' goal).

Is this fair and honest? A rethorical question indeed, because  
someone with

a grain of honesty in his bones, would at least admit that there *is*
criticism, whether you agree with it or not. But not so Ian and  
consorts,
ofcourse. *They* think their ego and keeping their pet-project on a  
pedestal
is more important then making a more NPOV wikipedia-article by  
including

various criticisms on the Freenet Project.

I'm actually not surpised to see him&co reacting like this, because I
already encountered the hypocrisy on his own blog (free speech  
proponent, my
ass)..but it still saddens me he is now using the wikipedia as his/ 
their

personal playground to work out his frustrated ego and bias.

I would ask anyone with a free and open mind to edit the wikipedia
freenet-article in a NPOV way, so that it may also contain the more  
negative
facts and some criticism, and not only acts as if no criticism  
exists. Yes,
I know, we all like freenet, at least as a concept, otherwise we  
wouldn't be
here, but I would like to remind everyone that a project is *not*  
helped by
optimistically misrepresenting things, neither by closing ones'  
eyes for
things that are poorly managed, and certainly not denying that  
there IS

criticism possible and being given. When making an NPOV article about
freenet, one should at least acknowledge that; the wikipedia  
deserves such a
thing. Understand me well; I'm not asking anyone to agree with my  
particular

criticism, I'm only asking that one can acknowledge that some - maybe
including you - have criticism on the project, and, of course, to  
m

[freenet-chat] Re: Ian clarke, self-proclaimed free-speech fan, censors criticism of the freenet-project

[Ian Clarke]

Ah, I see - anyone who thinks it is inappropriate for you to link to  
your own blog from a Wikipedia article must be a "Freenet fanboy".
Right.  You are pathetic, you won't even admit you are wrong when  
numerous independent people are telling you so. I suspect you are  
close to being banned from Wikipedia based on your behavior, you  
certainly deserve to be.


I removed your little rant for the simple reason that it is original  
research, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.  I was not the first  
to remove it, nor, I see, am I the last.


Note that the only reason you know I made this edit was because I  
chose to reveal it.  You, in contrast, sought to hide your identity  
when making your self-serving edits.


You assert that my motivation is simply to remove criticism so you  
obviously haven't looked very closely at the history of that page.   
Unlike you, I actually went out and found some independently written  
criticism, and added it to the page.  That is the appropriate way to  
try to achieve balance, not to abuse Wikipedia as a soap-box for your  
personal rants.


Ian.

On 10 Jan 2006, at 19:55, Newsbyte wrote:

Well...someone with Ians' nick, anyway, but I thought the title of  
this post
should reflect in the same way as that of Ians' about me. Equal  
treatement,

after all (no doubt he will be lecturing again about off-topic posts,
neglecting his same, earlier behaviour). And besides, I think there is
little doubt; feel free to deny it if it's not true/you, Ian.

As one can see on the wikipedia, a small group of freenet-fanboys  
there, and

probably Ian himself,  have consistently tried to censor any form of
criticism. Now, I myself am still fond of the freenet as a concept  
too, but
that doesn't mean I have to close my eyes for the things that go  
wrong, and
neither should anyone else, if they are really serious with helping  
the
project. But aparently, Ian and his cronies do not only not agree  
with the
criticism, they even don't want any mentionning that there *is*  
citicism on

the freenetproject.

Constantly new excuses are sought to justify the ongoing  
revertions, even
AFTER the agreement was reached that we would abide by the  
compromise a
wiki-admin had made with an edit. First, it was because it was  
posted by me;

but when somebody else posts it, it's to no avail anyway. Then, in the
interest of keeping the peace on the wikipedia, I agree with the  
decision of
a wiki-admin...but aparently, *I* am the only one considered to be  
bound to
it, and when a very watered-down wikiadmin-edit with the  
acknowledgement
that at least there IS criticism of the freenet-project, then  
suddenly no-1
else feels bothered by completely ignoring the agreement. When I  
revert to
that of the wikadmin-version, it is claimed there are no sources  
mentionned,
when I give a wikipage where the sources *are* mentionned, it is  
claimed

they are not notable, etc.

As one can see, a perfect catch-22; no criticism exists, because no  
sources
can be given, and when sources are given, then they are proclaimed  
to be of
trolls and lamenters and not notable, which means no sources have  
to be

reckoned with, which means the mentionning of the fact that there is
criticism can be deleted, so no critcism exists...

Thus even the simple fact that there *is* criticism is conveniently  
and
self-servingly kept out of the wikipedia-page, as if no such thing  
exists;
but in any pragmatic sense, it is clear it is just used by Ian and  
consorts
to let it appear if no such thing exists - completely in line whith  
his
continuous habbit of over-optimistic claims and mispresenting, in  
this case,
an article by making it less NPOV (which inherently happens, if you  
censor

criticism - a fact dictators well know, as Ian should know, seen his
purported 'free-speech in china' goal).

Is this fair and honest? A rethorical question indeed, because  
someone with

a grain of honesty in his bones, would at least admit that there *is*
criticism, whether you agree with it or not. But not so Ian and  
consorts,
ofcourse. *They* think their ego and keeping their pet-project on a  
pedestal
is more important then making a more NPOV wikipedia-article by  
including

various criticisms on the Freenet Project.

I'm actually not surpised to see him&co reacting like this, because I
already encountered the hypocrisy on his own blog (free speech  
proponent, my
ass)..but it still saddens me he is now using the wikipedia as his/ 
their

personal playground to work out his frustrated ego and bias.

I would ask anyone with a free and open mind to edit the wikipedia
freenet-article in a NPOV way, so that it may also contain the more  
negative
facts and some criticism, and not only acts as if no criticism  
exists. Yes,
I know, we all like freenet, at least as a concept, otherwise we  
wouldn't be
here, but I would like to remind everyone that a project is *not*  
helped by
optimistically misrepresenting things, neit

[freenet-chat] test, please disregard

[Ian Clarke]

just a test
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Ian clarke, self-proclaimed free-speech fan, censors criticism of the freenet-project

[Ian Clarke]

Ah, I see - anyone who thinks it is inappropriate for you to link to  
your own blog from a Wikipedia article must be a "Freenet fanboy".
Right.  You are pathetic, you won't even admit you are wrong when  
numerous independent people are telling you so. I suspect you are  
close to being banned from Wikipedia based on your behavior, you  
certainly deserve to be.


I removed your little rant for the simple reason that it is original  
research, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.  I was not the first  
to remove it, nor, I see, am I the last.


Note that the only reason you know I made this edit was because I  
chose to reveal it.  You, in contrast, sought to hide your identity  
when making your self-serving edits, and were angry when I  
(trivially) uncovered your activities.


Your assertion that my motivation is simply to remove criticism, you  
haven't looked very closely at the history of that page, unlike you,  
I actually went out and found some independently written criticism,  
and added it to the page.  That is the appropriate way to try to  
achieve balance, not to abuse Wikipedia as a soap-box as you do.


You are making a fool of yourself, and have destroyed whatever last  
morsel of credibility you might have had.


Ian.

On 10 Jan 2006, at 19:55, Newsbyte wrote:

Well...someone with Ians' nick, anyway, but I thought the title of  
this post
should reflect in the same way as that of Ians' about me. Equal  
treatement,

after all (no doubt he will be lecturing again about off-topic posts,
neglecting his same, earlier behaviour). And besides, I think there is
little doubt; feel free to deny it if it's not true/you, Ian.

As one can see on the wikipedia, a small group of freenet-fanboys  
there, and

probably Ian himself,  have consistently tried to censor any form of
criticism. Now, I myself am still fond of the freenet as a concept  
too, but
that doesn't mean I have to close my eyes for the things that go  
wrong, and
neither should anyone else, if they are really serious with helping  
the
project. But aparently, Ian and his cronies do not only not agree  
with the
criticism, they even don't want any mentionning that there *is*  
citicism on

the freenetproject.

Constantly new excuses are sought to justify the ongoing  
revertions, even
AFTER the agreement was reached that we would abide by the  
compromise a
wiki-admin had made with an edit. First, it was because it was  
posted by me;

but when somebody else posts it, it's to no avail anyway. Then, in the
interest of keeping the peace on the wikipedia, I agree with the  
decision of
a wiki-admin...but aparently, *I* am the only one considered to be  
bound to
it, and when a very watered-down wikiadmin-edit with the  
acknowledgement
that at least there IS criticism of the freenet-project, then  
suddenly no-1
else feels bothered by completely ignoring the agreement. When I  
revert to
that of the wikadmin-version, it is claimed there are no sources  
mentionned,
when I give a wikipage where the sources *are* mentionned, it is  
claimed

they are not notable, etc.

As one can see, a perfect catch-22; no criticism exists, because no  
sources
can be given, and when sources are given, then they are proclaimed  
to be of
trolls and lamenters and not notable, which means no sources have  
to be

reckoned with, which means the mentionning of the fact that there is
criticism can be deleted, so no critcism exists...

Thus even the simple fact that there *is* criticism is conveniently  
and
self-servingly kept out of the wikipedia-page, as if no such thing  
exists;
but in any pragmatic sense, it is clear it is just used by Ian and  
consorts
to let it appear if no such thing exists - completely in line whith  
his
continuous habbit of over-optimistic claims and mispresenting, in  
this case,
an article by making it less NPOV (which inherently happens, if you  
censor

criticism - a fact dictators well know, as Ian should know, seen his
purported 'free-speech in china' goal).

Is this fair and honest? A rethorical question indeed, because  
someone with

a grain of honesty in his bones, would at least admit that there *is*
criticism, whether you agree with it or not. But not so Ian and  
consorts,
ofcourse. *They* think their ego and keeping their pet-project on a  
pedestal
is more important then making a more NPOV wikipedia-article by  
including

various criticisms on the Freenet Project.

I'm actually not surpised to see him&co reacting like this, because I
already encountered the hypocrisy on his own blog (free speech  
proponent, my
ass)..but it still saddens me he is now using the wikipedia as his/ 
their

personal playground to work out his frustrated ego and bias.

I would ask anyone with a free and open mind to edit the wikipedia
freenet-article in a NPOV way, so that it may also contain the more  
negative
facts and some criticism, and not only acts as if no criticism  
exists. Yes,
I know, we all like freenet, at least as a conce

[freenet-chat] Re: Volunteers to help demo Freenet 0.7 2-3pm CET on Friday 30th

[Ian Clarke]

Many thanks to everyone that volunteered to help, but we have decided
that in the time available (only an hour), we are unlikely to have
time to do this :-(

We have put together a nice Java demo that we plan to share online
after we are done, and that people can play with.

Ian.

On 12/28/05, Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oskar and I are giving a talk on the darknet stuff in Berlin between
> 2-3pm on Friday 30th Dec, it would be cool if we could demo the
> current state of Freenet 0.7 during that, although it would mean that
> we would need some reliable volunteers to be available on IRC during
> that time so that we could set up a node.
>
> If you would like to help, please email me.
>
> Ian.
>
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Talking in Berlin tomorrow about Freenet 0.7

[Ian Clarke]

Oskar and I are giving a talk at 2pm tomorrow in Berlin at the
Berliner Conference Center, as part of the 22nd Chaos Communication
Congress.  Unfortunately its a bit pricey, a day pass costs €25, or
€10 for students, but there are plenty of interesting talks going on.

We spent today putting together quite a nice visual demo of the new
Darknet stuff in Freenet 0.7 so hopefully it should be interesting and
fun.  If anyone from these lists can make it, it would be good to see
you so if you can attend, definitely find us and say "hi" afterwards
;)

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Newsbyte spams Freenet Wikipedia page

[Ian Clarke]

Well, it seems that Newsbyte wasn't content just to abuse Wikipedia to
add links to his blog from the software patents article, but he also
decided to further abuse Wikipedia by adding links to his rantings
from the Freenet page:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Freenet&diff=30257012&oldid=29587696

Stunningly he did this 5 days *after* I exposed the fact that he had
spammed another article!  This guy clearly has no sense of shame.

Even after someone (not me) noticed that he was doing this, and
removed it, he had the gall to put it back, although this time he did
it from a different IP address (which still resolves to the same city
in Belgium - we aren't fooled Newsbyte).

Who knows how many other Wikipedia articles he has abused to raise the
profile of his incomprehensible ravings.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] OT: anti-social behaviour (Was: Re: [Tech] specs)

[Ian Clarke]

Newsbyte,

This is offtopic, but your recent emails reminded me about it, I beg
the indulgence of the list.

Before I add you to my /dev/null list again, one thing I wanted to
say. Please please stop spamming Wikipedia with links to your blog, it
is *really* uncool.

Before you embarrass yourself by denying it, lets look at the headers
from the last email you sent to the list.  This line was interesting:

Received: from aojrcfrqu0jg9l (082-146-104-116.dyn.adsl.xs4all.be

It was interesting, because a while ago I noticed that somebody kept
adding a link to your dumb blog rant on the software patents directive
to the Wikipedia page on the "Directive on the patentability of
computer-implemented inventions".  Not only did they add it once, but
that person re-added it a number of times after it had been removed.

According to the history of that page the IP address of this rather
persistent person was 195.144.64.17.

A simple reverse DNS lookup on this IP address revealed that their
hostname was srv017.bxl.xs4all.be.  Can you imagine it?!  Someone in
Belgium, using your ISP, that is unnervingly determined to add links
to *your* blog from a Wikipedia article?!

What an amazing coincidence!!!

But seriously, Wikipedia is a really useful site, but this kind of
self-serving behavior ruins it for everyone, and it *really* annoys me
when I discover it.  I would like to say that I was surprised to see
that you were doing this, but frankly I wasn't.

Could you please stop abusing this valuable resource to attract
undeserved attention to your rants?  Thanks.

Ian.
___
Tech mailing list
Tech@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] DAS-P2P Call for Papers, April 2006, Vienna

[Ian Clarke]

 
**

* The First International Workshop on
* Dependable and Sustainable Peer-to-Peer Systems (DAS-P2P 2006)
* http://das-p2p.wide.ad.jp/
*
* In conjunction with The First International Conference on
* Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES 2006).
* http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/ares2006/
*
* Vienna University of Technology, Austria
* April 20th-22nd, 2006
 
**


[CALL FOR PAPERS]

The First International Workshop on Dependable and Sustainable Peer- 
to-Peer
Systems (DAS-P2P 2006) is the first workshop which focuses on  
dependability

and sustainability of peer-to-peer (P2P) systems, with respect to their
designs, operations, applications and social impacts.

P2P can be a promising technology on which we can depend lives of  
ours and our

children, upon which we can build sustainable societies.

Designs of P2P systems are characterized by their usage of overlay  
networks
such that there is symmetry in the roles among participants. This  
implies
distribution of authorities, not only preventing introduction of  
single points
of failure, but also assuring a level of autonomy which allows many  
of us to
spontaneously start, maintain, or recover from failures of, such  
systems.


Although difficulties exist, such as uncertainty in the trust among
participants, one needs to be aware that such difficulties are, in  
many parts,

due to our own human nature; depending on P2P is, in fact and literally,
depending on ourselves and our friends, who seem to be the only ones  
we can

trust anyway, when it comes to our own survival.

The goal of this workshop is to share experiences, insights and new  
ideas, and
set forth research agendas and suggestive future directions by  
collaborations
among researchers with different disciplines and with similar  
interests toward

dependability and sustainability.

The following is a non-exhaustive list of relevant topics:

* Designs and operations of dependable and sustainable P2P systems
 - Self-organization and emergence
 - Attack-resistance
 - Fault tolerance
 - Sustainable operations
 - Sustainable mutual trust
 - Sustainable reciprocal relationships

* Applications and social impacts of dependable and sustainable P2P  
systems

 - Sustainable economy
 - Sustainable governance
 - Sustainable lifestyles
 - Rescue activities
 - Post-catastrophic recovery
 - Tackling environmental problems

The program of the workshop will be a combination of invited talks,  
paper

presentations and discussions.

[SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS]

The workshop invites your contributions of previously unpublished  
papers, which

will be selected based on their originality, technical merit and topical
relevance. Papers will also be selected by the likelihood that they  
will lead

to interesting and fruitful discussions at the workshop.

Your contributions should be formatted acoording to the Springer- 
Verlag LNCS
Proceedings Author Guidelines: 10-point, single-spaced, one-column  
format
(see http://www.springer.de/comp/lncs/authors.html for detail). Each  
of your

contributions should not exceed 10 pages.

See the workshop web site (http://das-p2p.wide.ad.jp/) for the  
submission

procedure.

[PUBLICATION]

Proceedings of the workshop will be published as Lecture Notes in  
Computer

Science (LNCS) by Springer-Verlag.

[IMPORTANT DATES]

Paper submission due:   December 4th, 2005
Notification of acceptance: January 15th, 2006
Camera-ready copies due:February 1st, 2006
Author registration due:February 1st, 2006
Workshop:   April 20th-22nd, 2006 (exact date is to  
be decided)


[REGISTRATION]

Workshop registration will be handled by the ARES 2006 organization  
along

with the main conference registration.

[PROGRAM COMMITTEE]

* Stephane Bressan, National University of Singapore, Singapore
* Bernard Burg, Panasonic Research, USA
* Ian Clarke, Freenet Project, UK
* Yusuke Doi, TOSHIBA Corporation, Japan (co-chair)
* Debojyoti Dutta, University of Southern California, USA
* Achmad Nizar Hidayanto, University of Indonesia, Indonesia
* Sam Joseph, University of Hawaii, USA
* Youki Kadobayashi, Nara Instritute of Science and Technology, Japan
  (co-chair)
* Anirban Mondal, University of Tokyo, Japan
* Akiko Orita, Keio University, Japan
* Omer F Rana, Cardiff University, UK
* Kenji Saito, Keio University, Japan (co-chair)
* Claudio Sartori, University of Bologna, Italy
* Sheng Zhong, State University of New York at Buffalo, USA

See the workshop web site (http://das-p2p.wide.ad.jp/) for any updates.

-
For further information, please contact program co-chair Kenji Saito,
Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University, 5322 Endo,  
Fujisawa,

Kanagawa 252-8520 Japan, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--


___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org

Re: [freenet-chat] Revision control systems

[Ian Clarke]

At the risk of repeating myself - I think we should be conservative,  
and that means Subversion.


My experience with distributed approaches has been one of confusion.

Ian.

On 22 Sep 2005, at 18:53, Matthew Toseland wrote:


There is a cvs2arch convertor. This is a bit of a hack though. It only
works with the HEAD branch (which is okay):
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-arch-users/2003-08/msg00198.html

However, arch may be dead. It *was* very popular, and *did* have a  
very
active community, last year, but there is only one person (tom  
lord) on
the savannah dev list, and rumours of it dying a death after he  
left. It
is also probably a bit complex to use. Also can be quite slow  
fetching a
revision. However it is post-1.0, and widely used, so presumably  
fairly

stable. Also does not support Windows well.

Also there is a more general and stable convertor that can move  
between

CVS, ArX, Darcs, and Monotone:
http://darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor

Darcs is interesting, although it has a couple of issues:
http://abridgegame.org/darcs/
http://lwn.net/Articles/110516/#Comments
Darcs does not have cryptographic signatures, which is an interesting
side-issue. Also can be slow in merging. Can import from CVS, Arch or
Subversion. More on darcs and arch [2] - search for darcs.

ArX is also promising:
http://www.nongnu.org/arx/
Has all the basic features, should be reasonably simple to use, is  
more

or less fully distributed but slow over high latency networking.
Hopefully this won't be a problem for Freenet 0.7.

So, does anyone have any opinions? Anyone used any of these? My
impression is that Subversion is essentially the same architecture as
CVS; it doesn't have any of the modern features such as proper
distribution/p2p support. It is however a significant improvement on
CVS, as Ian has pointed out.

IMHO we should choose a CVS replacement, and use it. Hopefully  
bandwidth

issues from anonymous checkouts won't be too big a problem; dodo has
15GB/mo. Personally I am of the opinion that something with proper
distribution support i.e. not Subversion, would be better because it
would be easier to adapt to Freenet, and because it would help third
parties who are on the periphery and therefore don't have CVS write
access. All the above (and many more) have atomic commits. ArX and  
Darcs

claim to have good merging. According to [1], Subversion's merging is
inferior to anything modern.

[1] yet another link, rather old:
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2004/01/29/scm_overview.html
another more recent comparison:
http://www.nongnu.org/arx/codecon/codecon.html
[2] another comparison
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/scm.html

Anyone with experience in any of the above?

With most of the above, we can provide a read-only repository via HTTP
with no extra modules needed, so anonymous checkout isn't  
necessarily a
problem either. There are also public options such as  
sourcecontrol.net.

Sourceforge and savannah can do arch (and presumably bazaar) also.

On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:


http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch
http://www.gnuarch.org/arch/arch-overview.html

On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 05:27:36PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:


http://www.gnu.org/software/gnu-arch/

Anyone had any experience? There is already a port to freenet,  
and the

guy who wrote it might perhaps be persuaded to update it; if not, we
might, eventually. The description sounds good.


--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.







___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Re: [Tech] Revision control systems

[Ian Clarke]

On 22 Sep 2005, at 17:27, Matthew Toseland wrote:


http://www.gnu.org/software/gnu-arch/

Anyone had any experience? There is already a port to freenet, and the
guy who wrote it might perhaps be persuaded to update it; if not, we
might, eventually. The description sounds good.


I have heard that it is a bit of a kludge, a mixture of scripts.

Seriously, the most important thing with a source control system is  
stability and reliability.  Subversion is stable and reliable, and is  
the emerging natural successor to cvs.


My vote remains with Subversion.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Tech] Re: [freenet-chat] Re: Hybrid network climbdown

[Ian Clarke]

On 22 Sep 2005, at 10:16, Alex R. Mosteo wrote:

I'm going to read too the "Using the Small-World Model to Improve
Freenet Performance" paper.


I wouldn't bother, it is flawed.  That paper proposes to replace LRU  
cache replacement with a mechanism that artificially enforces a  
Kleinberg link distribution, but have failed to realise that LRU  
cache replacement already achieves this in a much more natural and  
elegant manner (we have found this experimentally, and Oskar has been  
working on explaining this mathematically, with positive early results).


IIRC Oskar suspects that the authors of this paper's observed  
improvement in performance is much more likely to be due to the fact  
that their algorithm was better at ensuring the presence of short  
links in their experiments than LRU - but not that LRU wasn't  
achieving a Kleinberg link distribution.


Ian.

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Re: [Tech] Re: Hybrid network climbdown

[Ian Clarke]

On 21 Sep 2005, at 17:30, Alex R. Mosteo wrote:


Matthew Toseland wrote:


The main outstanding issue is how frequently we should do path  
folding.
If it is too slow, it will take too long to converge. But if it is  
too
fast, then oskar's routing algorithm won't be able to keep up. Is  
there

any way to determine an optimal time short of alchemy?



Is there some wiki/doc with further explanation of oskar's  
algorithm and

path folding details? I would like to understand it properly.


Right now just the slides of Oskar's and my presentation at Defcon/ 
Blackhat, Others have found this sufficient to explain the algorithm:



http://www.math.chalmers.se/~ossa/defcon13/


Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Project status update, and request for your help

[Ian Clarke]

It has been quite some time since I last sent a status update to the  
mailing lists.


This is an exciting time for the project, we are essentially  
rewriting Freenet from the ground up, embracing that which has  
worked, and throwing out that which hasn't.  Furthermore, we are  
fundamentally improving Freenet's security, functionality, and  
usability.


Version 0.7 of Freenet aims to create a scalable "darknet", where  
users only connect directly to other users they know and trust. The  
purpose of this change is to protect users who may be placed at risk  
simply by using the software, irrespective of what they are using it  
for.


In this new approach, only people you choose to connect to will know  
that you are running the software. Previous attempts at "dark" P2P  
networks, such as WASTE, have been limited to relatively small  
disconnected networks, allowing you to exchange information with a  
few of your friends, not beyond that.


The core innovation in Freenet 0.7 will be to allow a globally  
scalable darknet, capable of supporting millions of users, nobody has  
ever achieved anything like this before. This is made possible by the  
observation that human relationships tend to form small-world  
networks, a property that can be exploited to find short paths  
between any two people. The work is based on  a talk given at DEFCON  
13 in July by Oskar Sandberg and myself [1].


Other modifications include switching from TCP to UDP, which allows  
UDP hole punching along with faster transmission of messages between  
peers in the network.  This will greatly simplify the task of getting  
a Freenet node up and running, our goal is that you run the software,  
and it "just works", with no mucking around with firewalls or  
complicated configuration files.


We have learned much over the past few years.  One of those things is  
that it is difficult to simultaneously do experimental research,  
while at the same time deploying a working usable piece of software.   
As a result, 0.7 will in may ways be a simplification of Freenet,  
sticking more closely to that which we know works, and for which  
there is a strong mathematical basis, and leaving the more "far out"  
ideas to the academic community.


Having said that, from the user's perspective 0.7 will have  
significant new functionality.  While previously Freenet only  
supported the insertion and retrieval of information, Freenet 0.7  
will support new modes of usage including the real-time broadcast of  
messages. Applications of this range from real-time anonymous chat  
(perhaps through the IRC protocol) to RSS-feeds.


The work on all of this is well underway, with experimental code  
already being tested by a small group of volunteers (you can often  
find them in the #freenet-alphatest channel on irc.freenode.net).  We  
anticipate the public release of Freenet 0.7 before Christmas this year.


Using donations through this website, the project has been able to  
employ one developer full-time, Matthew Toseland. Matthew has since  
become the backbone of the Freenet development effort.


The project requires $2,300 per month to pay Matthew's modest salary,  
but at the time of writing our funds are seriously depleted, our  
current Paypal balance is only $372.42.  For that reason, I am  
appealing to supporters of the project to, once again, dig deep and,  
if you can, make a contribution to the ongoing development of the  
project in the form of a Paypal donation, subscription, or an E-Gold  
donation if you would rather not go through Paypal.


You can make a donation through the donations page on our website at:

   http://freenetproject.org/index.php?page=donations

If, for whatever reason, you would like to make a donation through other
means, please contact me directly at [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Many thanks,

Ian Clarke,
Coordinator, The Freenet Project.

Links:

[1] http://freenetproject.org/papers/vegas1_dc.pdf

___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Freenet on BBC

[Ian Clarke]

For those of you in the UK, there will be a piece on Freenet on  
"Click Online", which airs at 8.30pm this evening on BBC News 24.   
The piece is about 10 minutes into the show.


If anyone misses it, don't worry, the show is repeated at various  
other times, and is also on BBC America and BBC World.


Failing that, you can watch it online here:

  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/default.stm

Its actually pretty good.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Seeking Freenet user to talk to journalist

[Ian Clarke]

A journalist for a prominent publication has asked me whether he  
could speak to a user of Freenet that might have an interesting story  
to tell about how/why they use the software.  He is happy to keep  
their identity confidential if that is important to them.


If you think you can help, please email me and I will put you in  
touch.  I think his deadline is tomorrow, so please contact me ASAP.


Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: Freenet mention on BBC Radio 1 tommorow?

[Ian Clarke]

No, my interview was for "Click Online", and won't go out for around  
2 weeks.


Ian.

On 26 Aug 2005, at 20:18, Bob wrote:


Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:


Hmm, sorry maybe it wasn't today after all (although it sounded  
like it was).
There was a brief 'Internet issues' piece at 6:00pm again but it  
was about VoIP

and if it was going to take off, no mention of anonymous networks.

Bob



Much as I hate to endlessly self-reply I don't want to look like  
I'm making

stuff up :)  Maybe I half-heard a reference to this?

http://dodo.freenetproject.org/pipermail/iansblog/2005-August/ 
53.html
"I am flying to London for the day tomorrow to do an interview  
about online

anonymity for the BBC's Click Online show."

I scanned through the current show
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/default.stm)  
this lunchtime

but didn't see Ian, has it been broadcast yet?

Bob


___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ 
listinfo/chat

Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [Tech] Crazy idea: How trust in darknets enables secure democratic censorship

[Ian Clarke]

On 13 Jul 2005, at 17:14, Matthew Toseland wrote:

On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:27:31PM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:


I'm not getting sucked into this, mainly because I share Matthew
Exon's position on this and he is doing a pretty good job of
defending it.  Censorship by majority is just as bad as censorship by
your government, if not worse in many cases.

Toad, if you lived in Iran just how far do you think you would get
sharing information about Christianity if you could be censored by
those around you?  Is that the kind of Freenet we want to create?  It
certainly isn't the kind of Freenet I have been working towards for
the last 6 or 7 years...



Then go to another darknet.


The whole point of this is that there is only one darknet, a global  
one where everyone is (indirectly) connected to everyone else, so  
there is no "other" darknet.



Anyway there are technical issues preventing this, namely the need to
keep records of inserts (which would obviously be very useful to
attackers who can bust nodes).


Good, although I would rather the discussion ended for the right  
reason (ie. the idea is fundamentally contrary to Freenet's goals),  
rather than a technicality.


Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Re: [Tech] Crazy idea: How trust in darknets enables secure democratic censorship

[Ian Clarke]

I'm not getting sucked into this, mainly because I share Matthew  
Exon's position on this and he is doing a pretty good job of  
defending it.  Censorship by majority is just as bad as censorship by  
your government, if not worse in many cases.


Toad, if you lived in Iran just how far do you think you would get  
sharing information about Christianity if you could be censored by  
those around you?  Is that the kind of Freenet we want to create?  It  
certainly isn't the kind of Freenet I have been working towards for  
the last 6 or 7 years...


Ian.

On 13 Jul 2005, at 14:48, Matthew Exon wrote:


Matthew Toseland wrote:


On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 02:01:15PM +0200, Matthew Exon wrote:




Why do I, or Chinese christians, care whether the content is  
being distributed openly or secretly?  It's still being  
distributed, right? It's entirely possible that Al Qaeda are  
swapping jokes about the London Underground through my node right  
now.  The fact that it's invisible to me doesn't make me any  
happier about it.



It would be distributed primarily on paedophile only darknets. And
although SOME might be distributed on the open-ish darknets, they  
could

not be used for recruitment. It would be a MAJOR improvement on the
current situation.



So it's a reduction in the volume of bad stuff, not a complete  
solution.  I can buy this argument, but I'm not sure it's going to  
convince very many people.  You guess that you reduced the problem  
by 90%, but the problem was unmeasurable both before and after, so  
what can you really promise to these people?  Only that you're  
pretty certain you haven't solved the problem completely.



I thought you were trying to set it up so that porn can be traded  
as easily as now, but that I could still ensure that no porn  
passes through my node.  So I'd have a clear conscience, without  
anyone being cut off from the data they want.  In theory.  In  
practice, it looks like it won't work out so neatly.



No, that would be pointless.
I want to set up a system whereby a darknet can have its own  
standards
for content, which are determined democratically. If paedophiles  
aren't
welcome, they have to go elsewhere. They may be able to set up  
their own

network, but the main network wouldn't be helping them, and obviously
it'd be a smaller network (and not usable for recruiting).



OK.  This is a philosophical disagreement.  I'd go so far as to say  
I'd rather have the government censoring my communications than a  
simple majority of freenetters.  At least with the government, mob  
rule is moderated somewhat by courts and constitutions.  To really  
climb onto the soapbox for a bit, democracy is horribly overrated:  
the real source of freedom in our society is the humanist  
philosophical underpinnings of a legal system built from the  
experience of hundreds of years. Democracy is an important piece of  
the machine, without which it doesn't work very well, but democracy  
on its own isn't much better than nothing.  I'm not ready to submit  
to the tyranny of the majority yet.



As an aside, I wouldn't put too much faith in Chinese christians  
spending a lot of time worrying about child porn.  I'm sure  
they're not in favour of it, but it's just not the hot-button  
issue that it is in the West.  Porn in general, maybe, but  
probably not enough to stop them joining the students' porntastic  
darknet.


Well it's certainly a big deal in the West. And the future of  
democracy

in the West is by no means assured.



Democracy isn't looking particularly healthy in the USA right now,  
but comparing it to China or Burma would be a gross exaggeration.   
If Americans struggling against oppression in the US are too  
worried about the possibility of child porn to use Freenet,  
frankly, screw 'em.  They can use bittorrent.  I'm less than  
convinced that those worries would stop Chinese christians or  
democracy activists, and they're a far bigger concern for me.



Tibetans would be free to set up their own darknet within Tibet,  
but what's the point if they can't smuggle footage of human  
rights abuses out to Amnesty International?  And the new darknet  
would be such a tempting target for the Chinese government; much  
more so than a million students who, at the end of the day, much  
of the government regards as pretty harmless.



So harmless that they murdered 2000 of them in 1991.



Obviously I don't want to get backed into the position of seeming  
to minimise the horror of the Tiananmen Square massacre, and I  
don't want arguments about that to get in the way of my arguments  
about the accessibility of Freenet.  But there's no comparison  
between the level of oppression in the west and in the east of  
China today.  And I stand by my comment that much of the government  
regards the pro-democracy movement as pretty harmless.  The  
military doesn't, because they fear being locked up for what they  
did in 1991; but any move to round up studen

Re: [freenet-chat] Crazy idea: How trust in darknets enables secure democratic censorship

[Ian Clarke]

What a terrible idea.  Censorship by majority is still censorship.

Ian.

On 11 Jul 2005, at 16:17, Matthew Toseland wrote:


Here's a really whacky idea I came up with on the train back from
Strasbourg (please read the whole email before flaming me):

Personally I support Freenet being uncensorable and providing
untraceability for posters, because there is no way to prevent
censorship abuses by the powerful (including governments and
corporations), while still allowing censorship to prevent e.g.
child porn. I propose below a means that could provide some form of  
self

regulation, under locally democratic control, which would provide a
powerful deterrent to people posting objectionable materials. This is
only possible because of the trust relationships underlying a scalable
darknet such as Freenet 0.7/Dark. There is an argument that unpopular
content will fall out of the current Freenet; it won't if the original
insertor keeps on pushing it back in. Maybe, just maybe, we can  
have our
cake and eat it too. The result would be that freenet could be far  
more
mainstream, usable by far more people (e.g. oppressed religious  
groups in

china are likely to object to all the kiddy porn on freenet), and its
content would reflect what its users want rather than what the state
wants.

Definition: Premix ID:
- Each node has two identities. One is its pubkey and physical  
location

  to connect to it. This is only given out to its immediate peers, and
  they may not forward it, on a darknet. The second is its premix
  pubkey. This is the key which is used to encrypt premix-routed  
traffic
  which is sent through the node. This is public, along with the  
node's
  connections, in order for premix routing to work through the  
darknet -
  we have to expose the network topology in order for premix  
routing to

  work.

Client C finds some content he finds objectionable.
He sends out a Complaint to his friend nodes. This contains a  
pointer to

the objectionable content, and possibly C's premix ID (I'm not decided
on this bit).
Users can then verify the complaint - voting for it to be upheld or  
not

and for what sanctions to be applied. If it is not upheld by enough
nodes it is not propagated, so complaint spamming will be severely
limited.
Each node can decide whether the complaint is upheld. It will take  
into

account its own vote if any (weight 1), the votes of its friend nodes
(weight 1), and the votes of those nodes connected to its friend nodes
(probably weighted 1/n where n is the number of nodes connected to a
given friend node). There would be turnout requirements (say 2/3), and
supermajority requirements which depend on what sanction is called  
for.


If the complaint is upheld, then the network will attempt to trace the
insertor, and possibly any requestors, of the data:

If a node was on the insert path, AND it considers the complaint to  
have
been upheld, it will check its records and attempt to trace the  
request.
As will the next node on the chain. The original insertor will be  
found,

and its premix ID exposed. Possible sanctions are:
- Reprimand; upheld complaint is recorded on the node's record
- Premix disconnect; node may no longer use premix routing
- Full disconnect; node may not remain connected to the network.
  Requires a larger supermajority.
- Blow the node; node's IP address is broadcast (endangers the network
  itself, would require 80% or so majority, and could be turned off on
  some networks).

The idea here is that we produce a deterrant. Nodes won't insert  
content
regarded as bad by the majority of a particular network, because of  
the

risks involved, and therefore complaints should be rare. The content
itself would be blocked, but only after the vote, which could take a
reasonable time - say 2 weeks - during which any interested  
individuals
could inspect the objectionable content (many will simply follow  
others,

but this is not a problem as the content _is_ available; provided the
system works, complaints will be rare and people will not have to  
browse

through filth on a regular basis). This should keep the whole process
accountable.

If the original insertor is not found, we can get as close as  
possible.

Since there will likely be several blocks to trace (even if the
objectionable content is a single file), and since we know the network
topology, we can do some form of correlation attack - and narrow it  
down
to a particular area of the network. If it is one node, we can take  
the
above sanctions; if it is a group of nodes (or a particular link or  
set
of links), then we can break those connections and fork the network  
into

two disconnected darknets with different standards (it should be
reasonably easy to determine this given enough data to trace).

Votes would have to be public for this to work (at least, public to
nearby nodes). There is no secret ballot. On the other hand, since we
are assuming that Freenet nodes are illegal in any case in the

[freenet-chat] Newsbyte trolls /.

[Ian Clarke]

One of Newsbyte's trolling attempts seems to have made it on to  
Slashdot:

  http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl? 
sid=05/05/16/1212248&tid=156

Fortunately, many of the comments point out that Newsbyte is a troll  
that hasn't contributed a single line of code to the project, so I  
think his little piece of gadflyery has backfired quite nicely.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] AnonySlash?

[Ian Clarke]

http://infoanarchy.org/ I suppose, although I don't think it is very 
active these days.

Ian.
On 18 Apr 2005, at 16:31, Todd Walton wrote:
Anyone know of anything Slashdot-like that caters specifically to the
anonymity/crypto crowd?
-todd
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at 
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: Freenet on MPAA radar

[Ian Clarke]

On 26 Mar 2005, at 15:03, Jes wrote:
Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
See attachment (from
http://ice.citizenlab.org/blogimages/mpaa-freenet.png).
I do not find this amusing.
This is exactly how freenet is perceived by many (and what it has 
become):
an anonymous p2p application, perfect for child porn.:o(
What does this have to do with child porn?  Why are you taking 
something that has nothing to-do with child porn, and making it about 
child porn?  Why are you so obsessed with child pornography?

Do you have children, Ian?
I hope not.
Ian.
--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] request for java 1.5 compilation ..

[Ian Clarke]

On 15 Mar 2005, at 14:25, Matthew Toseland wrote:
This is the one we discussed?
A and B both start sending packets to one another at the same time i.e.
equivalent of TCP simultaneous connect, which unlike the TCP version,
reasonably reliably works with UDP?
Correct.
 This is not a deliberate feature in
NATs to aid UDP transit - it's something that is inevitable from how 
UDP
works...
Semantics.  The important point is that we aren't relying on some kind 
of "bug" that is liable to be fixed at any time, it is a deliberate 
feature that is essential to almost *any* useful usage of UDP over a 
NAT.

Ian.
--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] request for java 1.5 compilation ..

[Ian Clarke]

On 15 Mar 2005, at 11:40, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Dijjer doesn't do NAT-hopping iirc.
Yes it does, assuming we have the same definition of "NAT-hopping".  It 
uses a variation of "UDP hole punching" as described in [1], except 
without needing a rendezvous server (well, one is needed the first time 
a node joins the network, but thereafter it uses other peers in the 
network to serve this purpose).

Ian.
[1] http://www.brynosaurus.com/pub/net/p2pnat.pdf
--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] request for java 1.5 compilation ..

[Ian Clarke]

On 14 Mar 2005, at 23:55, Greg Wooledge wrote:
Matthew Toseland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 01:33:35PM +, Ian Clarke wrote:

Perhaps you could clarify exactly what is wrong with Freenet working
out-of-the-box for 90% of our users?  What is your better suggestion?
The problem is when it fails to work for the other 10%.
Nothing I have ever proposed would preclude Freenet from working on any 
architecture with a non-buggy Java implementation and an even half-sane 
connection to the Internet.  Some scenarios may require a bit of 
configuration, but only because there is absolutely no alternative.

The other half of the rant relates to my suspicion that the UDP
NAT-hopping tricks will fail to work reliably on several kinds of
firewalls.  I have absolutely no evidence to support this apart from
this:
UDP NAT-hopping works on the vast majority of firewalls >>without any 
reconfiguration of the firewall whatsoever<<.  On the rest, it may 
require port-forwarding, meaning that even in the worst case scenario 
it is no different to Freenet, or most other P2P applications today, 
but in the scenario of the majority of Freenet users, it will be a 
significant improvement.

The NAT-hopping takes advantage of a very deliberate feature of most 
firewalls which allows them to facilitate bi-directional UDP 
communication, this feature is necessary because UDP is a 
connectionless protocol.

To get Dijjer working try forwarding UDP port 9114 from your firewall 
to the same port on your computer (in due course we will add 
instructions for doing this, Dijjer is still a work in progress).

Ian.
--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] request for java 1.5 compilation ..

[Ian Clarke]

On 5 Mar 2005, at 04:05, A Nony Mouse wrote:
The bedraggled man in the rear corner of the room stood, cleared his 
throat
and asked, "Will 0.7 still support us depraved windows users who, for
whatever reason, cannot move to *nix?"
I'm not really sure what prompted this question, but I am not aware of 
anything that would preclude use of Freenet 0.7 on any platform for 
which there is a Java 1.4 runtime environment (and this includes 
Windows).

Ian.
--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] request for java 1.5 compilation ..

[Ian Clarke]

On 8 Mar 2005, at 23:17, Greg Wooledge wrote:
I don't doubt Matthew's abilities
or dedication, but I often doubt Ian's vision, with his tendency to say
things like, "If it works for Windows users, through a $50 black-box
NAT router, that's 90% of the market, and that's good enough for now."
I just love it when people put words in my mouth.  I'm not really sure 
what you are talking about here, but my "vision" for 0.7 is that it 
will be *at least* as easy to configure and use as any other P2P 
application out there, something that I don't think we would ever have 
achieved without the 0.7 rewrite.

Perhaps you could clarify exactly what is wrong with Freenet working 
out-of-the-box for 90% of our users?  What is your better suggestion?

Ian.
--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
chat@freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Freenet on MPAA radar

[Ian Clarke]

See attachment (from 
http://ice.citizenlab.org/blogimages/mpaa-freenet.png).

I find this quite amusing :-)

Ian.

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pastedGraphic1_tiff.DEFANGED-140
Type: application/defanged-140
Size: 50176 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

-- next part --

--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
-- next part --
___
chat mailing list
chat at freenetproject.org
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:chat-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

[freenet-chat] Newsbyte debate

[Ian Clarke]

Much as I enjoy debate, the one pertaining to the appropriateness of my 
deletion of NewsByte's @freenetproject.org account belongs on the chat 
mailing list, not on tech, and definitely not on support.

I am happy to concede that I might have encouraged it by responding to 
his comments here, but nonetheless I would ask, in the interests of 
newbies who may actually want to learn about using Freenet, that any 
further conversation on this subject, whether for or against, is moved 
to chat.

Ian.
--
Founder, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
CEO, Cematics Ltd   http://cematics.com/
Personal Blog   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Republicans come out against Induce

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Most American Conservatives generally don't like the entertainment 
industry or the legal industry, so this isn't all that surprising, 
since Induce helps both.

Ian.
On 24 Sep 2004, at 14:52, Toad wrote:
Cool, they did something useful ;). Seriously, adverts in the 
mainstream
press is great. I bet Bush is pro-induce though. There are freedom cons
and bigbiz cons, just like here there are smallbiz cons and bigbiz
cons... right? Hey this is the CHAT list!! :)

On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 07:44:54AM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This can only be a good thing, the American Conservative Union is 
going
to run ads which oppose the Induce Act.  The ad is linked at the 
bottom
of the press release, and it is a pretty succinct summary of why the
Induce Act is so wrong.

Go Republicans! :-)
From: http://conservative.org/pressroom/040920.asp :
Criminal Penalties Suggested in S. 2560 are Anti-Consumer and Set
Dangerous Precedent, Says ACU
ACU Launches Campaign to Oppose S. 2650: Inducing Infringement of
Copyrights Act
ALEXANDRIA, VA ??? Third parties should not be held legally liable for
the criminal acts of others solely to appease Hollywood millionaires
and their trial attorney friends, the American Conservative Union said
today in announcing a major advertising campaign opposing S. 2650 the
"Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004."
"This misguided legislation would hold manufacturers of computers,
software and other technologies criminally liable if their legal
products were misused to reproduce copyrighted material," ACU 
Executive
Director Richard Lessner said announcing the organization's ad
campaign.

"It is a basic foundation of American jurisprudence, recognized in the
Supreme Court's landmark Sony Betamax decision, that those who 
actually
violate copyrights should be held criminally responsible, not those 
who
manufactured the computer, VCR, copy machine, or computer software 
used
to infringe. S. 2650 is tantamount to holding gun makers liable for 
the
acts of armed criminals, or automakers responsible for drunk drivers."

While the protection of intellectual property rights is an important
issue, Lessner said, and the infringement of copyrights is a serious
problem, S. 2650 is an overly broad remedy. It would penalize
technology producers for "inducing" others to act criminally. The
bill's standard of inducement, however, is so subjective that it would
chill technological innovation, severely restrict consumer choice in
the marketplace, and create a whole new class of lawsuits for 
predatory
trial attorneys.

"Unfortunately, this misguided legislation's chief sponsor is Sen.
Orrin Hatch, a Republican who should know better," Lessner said. "ACU
is launching a major advertising campaign to educate the public and
Republicans in Congress about the dangerous nature of this
trial-attorney boondoggle.
"An important principle is at stake here. If this bill were to become
law, it would set a precedent for holding innocent Americans liable 
for
indirectly 'inducing' criminal acts in others. The implications are
staggering."

ACU's campaign launches today with an advertisement in The Weekly
Standard. The ad also will appear in The Wall Street Journal, The
Washington Times, National Review, Human Events, and selected web
sites.
http://www.conservative.org/pressroom/Ad2REv4.pdf
--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBVCi5QtgxRWSmsqwRAmBeAJ9aBNtmcDn3xkA36nf8DpjGBRO35ACfQ5hO
zPBaSkRKXLgE7Lb4Wn4OGOY=
=oRTX
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-chat] Republicans come out against Induce

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This can only be a good thing, the American Conservative Union is going 
to run ads which oppose the Induce Act.  The ad is linked at the bottom 
of the press release, and it is a pretty succinct summary of why the 
Induce Act is so wrong.

Go Republicans! :-)
From: http://conservative.org/pressroom/040920.asp :
Criminal Penalties Suggested in S. 2560 are Anti-Consumer and Set 
Dangerous Precedent, Says ACU

ACU Launches Campaign to Oppose S. 2650: Inducing Infringement of 
Copyrights Act

ALEXANDRIA, VA â Third parties should not be held legally liable for 
the criminal acts of others solely to appease Hollywood millionaires 
and their trial attorney friends, the American Conservative Union said 
today in announcing a major advertising campaign opposing S. 2650 the 
"Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004."

"This misguided legislation would hold manufacturers of computers, 
software and other technologies criminally liable if their legal 
products were misused to reproduce copyrighted material," ACU Executive 
Director Richard Lessner said announcing the organization's ad 
campaign.

"It is a basic foundation of American jurisprudence, recognized in the 
Supreme Court's landmark Sony Betamax decision, that those who actually 
violate copyrights should be held criminally responsible, not those who 
manufactured the computer, VCR, copy machine, or computer software used 
to infringe. S. 2650 is tantamount to holding gun makers liable for the 
acts of armed criminals, or automakers responsible for drunk drivers."

While the protection of intellectual property rights is an important 
issue, Lessner said, and the infringement of copyrights is a serious 
problem, S. 2650 is an overly broad remedy. It would penalize 
technology producers for "inducing" others to act criminally. The 
bill's standard of inducement, however, is so subjective that it would 
chill technological innovation, severely restrict consumer choice in 
the marketplace, and create a whole new class of lawsuits for predatory 
trial attorneys.

"Unfortunately, this misguided legislation's chief sponsor is Sen. 
Orrin Hatch, a Republican who should know better," Lessner said. "ACU 
is launching a major advertising campaign to educate the public and 
Republicans in Congress about the dangerous nature of this 
trial-attorney boondoggle.

"An important principle is at stake here. If this bill were to become 
law, it would set a precedent for holding innocent Americans liable for 
indirectly 'inducing' criminal acts in others. The implications are 
staggering."

ACU's campaign launches today with an advertisement in The Weekly 
Standard. The ad also will appear in The Wall Street Journal, The 
Washington Times, National Review, Human Events, and selected web 
sites.

http://www.conservative.org/pressroom/Ad2REv4.pdf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBU8JnQtgxRWSmsqwRAndkAJ9YoKw4YzYHF5QsCvOQPJl6FeEGPgCfY3Dx
YITFIKaSz8X+SOmL/G44QqE=
=FXBz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-chat] Can Freenet work? (Re: QoS again (Re: [Tech] Reducing the file

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7 Sep 2004, at 17:37, Newsbyte wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7 Sep 2004, at 15:50, Newsbyte wrote:
I can't but feel that, if you had been more supportive and open to
these
ideas, we would long have had a testnetwork or the necessary
simulations.
Wrong.  We have had both a test network, two if you count unstable as 
a
test network, and we have had numerous simulations over the years.

No, I don't count it that way.
Unless the way you count it violates the most basic rules of 
mathematics, I don't see how you could count it differently.

 And one try at a testnetwork is rather
meager, considered that there have been dozens of tries at 
rate-limiting and
NGR.
Really, explain exactly how many testnetworks we should have, what are 
the differences between them, and justify the time required to create 
them.

Nobody has actually supported the claim that our current approach is
"haphazard",
*YOU* did yourself. (Well, at least, you said it was haphazard, I don't
remember anymore if you actually supported your own claim).
I can't recall every word I may ever have uttered, but if I did say it 
was haphazard (which is unlikely), it certainly wasn't with the intent 
of providing a justification for your unsubstantiated claims.

True. And note that I didn't say it is certain in any absolutist form 
(I
repeat that at the end), I just say that I feel that we would have been
further in development. As a feeling, it is not worthless, as an 
argument,
it is.
Lots of people have feelings, few of those feelings are worth sending 
to this list unless one is willing to back up those feelings with a 
credible argument.  Clearly, you aren't.

 However, you're feeling that it won't do any good and would be a
waste of time is equally worthless as an argumentation.
What won't do any good?  Again, vague assertions.  I asked several 
simple questions in my last email, you haven't answered any of them.  
If you can't bother to answer simple questions about what you are 
saying, then why should anyone waste their time reading what you have 
to say?

 In this respect,
your own opinion of it is as much unfalsifiable,
My opinion of what?  What is the unfalsifiable thing I said?
 and we could go on like
this ad infintum. The only way to know is to actually implement it, 
and do
it good and with the right scope, this time.
Implement what?  The thing you think we should implement based on your 
"feeling"?  I think we might need a better rationale than that.

> And I don't think your complaints in this regard are justified; I 
remind
you, that I have not only indicated problems in the past, but almost 
always
provided possible solutions or alternatives. That you or toad or some 
other
dudes thought they were crap (maybe justified in some instances) does 
not
give you the right to say I only speak in hindsight.
Where exactly did I claim that you *only* speak in hindsight?
 I have been arguing for
a testnetwork, for instance, for a very, very long time, and only now 
things
are beginning to turn that way. You can't possibly say I just brought 
this
up now, in hindsight.
We created a test network a few months ago.  It is easy to advocate a 
test network, the difficult questions are what should it look like, and 
what should it test.

In my view, we wasted a lot of time and energy and finances due to an
inefficient way of working,
Another broad unsubstantiated claim.  Prey tell us, oh all-knowing 
one,
what exactly was done that shouldn't have been done, and given what we
knew at the time, why should we have chosen to do something else?

High horse and all that.
We shouldn't have implemented rate-limiting and NGR without knowing if 
even
the basic premises on what they were based on were valid and worked.
In both cases the best way to test these premises was to implement them 
since both were designed to address real-world problem which were very 
difficult to simulate.

 We
SHOULD have made an elaborate and modern testnetwork and simulators to 
check
them out first, and see if they uberhaupt worked.
Easily said, not easily done.  Please explain how to design a simulator 
to simulate the problems NGR and rate limiting were designed to 
address.

A bad what?  Please give specific examples to support your argument
rather than relying on a broad unsubstantiated premise.
A bad decision. To go on and on the way we did/do. (see above) And 
btw, even
if I couldn't give anything else then broad unsubstantiated premises, 
why do
you expect a higher standard from me, then you do from yourself?
Because you seem to think that had we followed your advice we would 
have done better, thus it is you that is asserting that you have a 
higher standard, not me.

His name is "osKar", and would a spellchecker really be *that* much
trouble?
A spellchecker wouldn't find it's Oskar. And, besides the fact that my
spellingchecker is in another (non-eng

Re: [freenet-chat] Can Freenet work? (Re: QoS again (Re: [Tech] Reducing the file

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7 Sep 2004, at 15:50, Newsbyte wrote:
I can't but feel that, if you had been more supportive and open to 
these
ideas, we would long have had a testnetwork or the necessary 
simulations.
Wrong.  We have had both a test network, two if you count unstable as a 
test network, and we have had numerous simulations over the years.

You always doubted if they were going to do any good, and indeed, it 
remains
to be seen how useful a tools they will be, but on the other hand, it 
was
clear we weren't going anywhere with the current, haphazard way 
neither,
even a year ago.
Nobody has actually supported the claim that our current approach is 
"haphazard", all we have is a number of people repeating the claim over 
and over again without support or justification.  It is very easy to 
say "oh, if only we had done X things would be further along by now" - 
but as Oskar would say, this is an unfalsifiable claim, and thus 
worthless.  If you have specific examples of failures in our approach 
then please state them, but don't waste our time with your 20:20 
hindsight.

In my view, we wasted a lot of time and energy and finances due to an
inefficient way of working,
Another broad unsubstantiated claim.  Prey tell us, oh all-knowing one, 
what exactly was done that shouldn't have been done, and given what we 
knew at the time, why should we have chosen to do something else?

 I know you mean well,
and you have to make decisions and you are limited in your 
possibilities, so
it's not that I don't understand. But still, I think you hung on too 
much
too long on a bad one, in this regard.
A bad what?  Please give specific examples to support your argument 
rather than relying on a broad unsubstantiated premise.

 There has been precious little
checking if new features did what they where suppose to do and why 
(not),
and I think this was pretty aparent.
Examples?
 And without that, as Oscar said, you
can't expect much progress.
His name is "osKar", and would a spellchecker really be *that* much 
trouble?

Ian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBPdkhQtgxRWSmsqwRAu8kAJ9r/wunXsYy35rDzolT2oOu7tEBJQCfRWTa
dbHM+nd0XrbGkNYkSjxaUeg=
=So8G
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Can Freenet work? (Re: QoS again (Re: [Tech] Reducing the file

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You are arguing against a strawman.  I never entirely discounted 
Oskar's argument, in fact, if you have been following devl you will 
note that Toad will shortly be starting work on a simulation of NGR to 
address some of the valid points Oskar made.

Ian.
On 6 Sep 2004, at 17:15, Newsbyte wrote:
Stop replying to something I have not said. I don't know what you are
reading, but I have never said anywhere that anything should be
mathematically proven. I advocate experimentation, and what I am
saying is that none of it going on here.

Does "Absence of proof is not proof of absence" sound familiar?  
Anyway:
While you both have some interesting points, I must agree with oscar 
(even
though we disagree a lot on some other points). I think his basic 
point is,
that the devl cyclus that the project takes is crap, in the sense that 
it is
haphazard.

Now, I know You like to potray it as enivitable due to it's 
experimental
nature, but, frankly, that seems just an easy way out for explaining 
the
shortcomings. It has nothing to do with your perceived idea that 
oponents of
the current development are mathimatical perfectionists, as you always 
seem
to claim.

I agree with you (Ian) that in some more detailed points oskar made, he
might be a bit expecting to much of a Freenet in development (or out 
beta
stage, even); anonymity can never be absolute, and it all depends on 
what
effort (cost/benefit) it involves. (Hence my proposal for the
encryptionlayer of the datastorage that has, through the law, more 
legal
protection to some legal harrassement practises).

This has nothing to do with his basis premisse that things should be 
done in
a more structured way, and you are wrong in claiming using a more 
sientific
method can not be done, because of the intrinsic experimental nature of
freenet. A scientific endeavour is NOT the same as thinking out a 
complete
theory till all details fit, and then making a perfect tool in one 
stroke,
but it DOES mean, as Oskar hinted, that you have a process of 
developping a
theory, testing that theory, observing the experiment(s) and looking 
at how
it holds up to the theory, adapting the theory and/or the experiments 
and
trying it out again, etc. The process of falsification is paramount to 
the
scientific progress made, and NO other way has resulted in more succes 
then
that, including guessing and trying things out haphazardly.

Besides, I find it a bit puzzling you are defending the current
development-process so much, as it is actually your word(s), that we 
are
doing things too haphazardly. I remember clearly because I was reading 
your
post (several months ago) where you claimed exactly that, and I had to 
look
it up because I didn't know for sure what it meant. So, you 
acknowledged it
yourself, back then...so what changed? We are STILL doing it 
haphazardly. If
you were criticising it yourself back then, you should still criticise 
it
today, since nothing fundamentzal changed.

You can claim we have made progress in this or that area, but the 
bottom
line is, the network is still pretty much crappy. And basides, we maybe
would have made a lot more progress if we had done things a bit more
scientific and structured, instead of trying things out on a hinch or
'intuition'. The example you give is very interesting, but it's not a
shortage of novel ideas we have, it's adequately testing those ideas 
and
analysing and adapting them so they become novel *working* ideas.

And saying 'make a fork if you don't like it' is pretty weak too.  It 
would
enveriably diffuse the effort and finances we have, and it's not like 
we
have an infinite amount of those. If a fork would be made, it would
enevitably weaken the two projects, maybe to a point of where both 
would
completely grind to a halt. That's why I wasn't interested in the 
offer of
joining the former try of a freenetfork with the 0.5.x branche, if you
remember that episode). I just thought it was a waste of time and 
effort.
The project does not genereate THAT much interest that it can 
succesfully
sustain 2 variants in development, IMHO. It does not mean the critique 
given
is unvalid, though, and, as I said, you once agreed to it yourself.

So why not try to remedie it? The alternative that oscar proposes is 
NOT
dissabandonning the project, as you seem to think, but rather revert 
it back
to when it was a in a more simple and managable stage, and try to
investigate every new feature or implementation thoroughly, see if it 
works,
and if it doesn't, analyse why and try to fix THAT, one step at a 
time. It's
NOT the approach we use today (and which has nothing to do with the 
work of
Toad, because I'm sure he's working hard, only he's trapped in the same
non-scientific system-of-guesses).

Another alternative (and maybe even necessary in oskars suggestion) 
would be
the testnetwork I have spoken of before. Your counteragrument is 
always 'it
didn't work the time we tried it befor

Re: [freenet-chat] Freenet & China

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It isn't on a predetermined port - is it?
Ian.
On 1 Sep 2004, at 17:55, Toad wrote:
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 05:54:20PM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well, this was the whole point of the distribution servlet.
Which will be blocked at every transparent proxy. If we're lucky they
don't have the hardware to block within an ISP yet.
Ian.
On 1 Sep 2004, at 17:48, Toad wrote:
Hmm. The current scheme blocks any web page that includes any of the
below
words, correct? They'll just have to download it through an SSL 
proxy,
or share it internally... I'm sure there are chinese groups quite
capable of redistributing Freenet.

On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 08:09:37AM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
From
http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/chinadn/en/archives/
002885.html
:
It is an open secret that all Chinese Internet hosting services,
including wireless and instant messenger services, filter user
communication through key word blocking mechanisms. But overly 
vague
and broad Chinese internet laws and the internet police force never
made the forbidden words explicit -- Not until some Chinese hackers
located a document within the installation package of QQ instant
messaging software. The file contains over one thousand words, most
of
them in Chinese, which will be blocked by the service.
...snip...
From Program Files\Tencent\QQGame\COMToolKit.dll:
falun
sex
tianwang
cdjp
av
bignews
boxun
chinaliberal
chinamz
chinesenewsnet
cnd
creaders
dafa
dajiyuan
dfdz
dpp
falu
falun
falundafa
flg
freechina
freedom
freenet  < Nice to know they care
fuck
GCD
gcd
hongzhi
hrichina
huanet
hypermart
incest
jiangdongriji
lihongzhi
making
minghui
minghuinews
nacb
naive
nmis
paper
peacehall
playboy
renminbao
renmingbao
rfa
safeweb
sex
simple
svdc
taip
tibetalk
triangle
triangleboy
UltraSurf
unixbox
ustibet
voa
voachinese
wangce
wstaiji
xinsheng
yuming
zhengjian
zhengjianwang
zhenshanren
zhuanfalun
bitch
fuck
shit
...snip Chinese words...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBNXWxQtgxRWSmsqwRApbgAJ4x1YaoFwQONIvl9jKpWR53IHK+swCdEeuL
Gap605JvTTURf5SvROdVXuM=
=3Fr0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBNf68QtgxRWSmsqwRAtBkAJ4hob3thG6m0ixduzx5ld4azAUAagCdHakv
cn4MKD+znns++psJhKOqvUM=
=GpX/
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBNf/tQtgxRWSmsqwRAoF2AJ9aG7EygQbpbnl79hyieEeVDZQroQCfV4C9
GpXo+OHLmGZlAkRbu37hIek=
=7fOl
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Freenet & China

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well, this was the whole point of the distribution servlet.
Ian.
On 1 Sep 2004, at 17:48, Toad wrote:
Hmm. The current scheme blocks any web page that includes any of the  
below
words, correct? They'll just have to download it through an SSL proxy,
or share it internally... I'm sure there are chinese groups quite
capable of redistributing Freenet.

On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 08:09:37AM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
From
http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/chinadn/en/archives/ 
002885.html
:

It is an open secret that all Chinese Internet hosting services,
including wireless and instant messenger services, filter user
communication through key word blocking mechanisms. But overly vague
and broad Chinese internet laws and the internet police force never
made the forbidden words explicit -- Not until some Chinese hackers
located a document within the installation package of QQ instant
messaging software. The file contains over one thousand words, most  
of
them in Chinese, which will be blocked by the service.
...snip...
From Program Files\Tencent\QQGame\COMToolKit.dll:
falun
sex
tianwang
cdjp
av
bignews
boxun
chinaliberal
chinamz
chinesenewsnet
cnd
creaders
dafa
dajiyuan
dfdz
dpp
falu
falun
falundafa
flg
freechina
freedom
freenet  < Nice to know they care
fuck
GCD
gcd
hongzhi
hrichina
huanet
hypermart
incest
jiangdongriji
lihongzhi
making
minghui
minghuinews
nacb
naive
nmis
paper
peacehall
playboy
renminbao
renmingbao
rfa
safeweb
sex
simple
svdc
taip
tibetalk
triangle
triangleboy
UltraSurf
unixbox
ustibet
voa
voachinese
wangce
wstaiji
xinsheng
yuming
zhengjian
zhengjianwang
zhenshanren
zhuanfalun
bitch
fuck
shit
...snip Chinese words...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBNXWxQtgxRWSmsqwRApbgAJ4x1YaoFwQONIvl9jKpWR53IHK+swCdEeuL
Gap605JvTTURf5SvROdVXuM=
=3Fr0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBNf68QtgxRWSmsqwRAtBkAJ4hob3thG6m0ixduzx5ld4azAUAagCdHakv
cn4MKD+znns++psJhKOqvUM=
=GpX/
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Freenet & China

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
From 
http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/chinadn/en/archives/002885.html 
:

It is an open secret that all Chinese Internet hosting services, 
including wireless and instant messenger services, filter user 
communication through key word blocking mechanisms. But overly vague 
and broad Chinese internet laws and the internet police force never 
made the forbidden words explicit -- Not until some Chinese hackers 
located a document within the installation package of QQ instant 
messaging software. The file contains over one thousand words, most of 
them in Chinese, which will be blocked by the service.
...snip...
From Program Files\Tencent\QQGame\COMToolKit.dll:
 falun
 sex
 tianwang
 cdjp
 av
 bignews
 boxun
 chinaliberal
 chinamz
 chinesenewsnet
 cnd
 creaders
 dafa
 dajiyuan
 dfdz
 dpp
 falu
 falun
 falundafa
 flg
 freechina
 freedom
 freenet  < Nice to know they care
 fuck
 GCD
 gcd
 hongzhi
 hrichina
 huanet
 hypermart
 incest
 jiangdongriji
 lihongzhi
 making
 minghui
 minghuinews
 nacb
 naive
 nmis
 paper
 peacehall
 playboy
 renminbao
 renmingbao
 rfa
 safeweb
 sex
 simple
 svdc
 taip
 tibetalk
 triangle
 triangleboy
 UltraSurf
 unixbox
 ustibet
 voa
 voachinese
 wangce
 wstaiji
 xinsheng
 yuming
 zhengjian
 zhengjianwang
 zhenshanren
 zhuanfalun
 bitch
 fuck
 shit
...snip Chinese words...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBNXWxQtgxRWSmsqwRApbgAJ4x1YaoFwQONIvl9jKpWR53IHK+swCdEeuL
Gap605JvTTURf5SvROdVXuM=
=3Fr0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] RE: anonymity(NOT)

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25 Aug 2004, at 19:23, Newsbyte wrote:
yes, well, this reminds me of the eternal flamewars on /. between the
merrits of BSD and GPL.
Not everyone sees it as black and white, however.
Call it FLOSS, then, or 'public source' or whatever. Point is, as long 
as
the code is public and openly available, there is little to fear that
somehow the product would be a trap and insidiously have backdoors or 
sort.

But it still would have DMCA protection.
So you are going to abandon all the benefits of using an open source 
license to avail of the "protection" of a bad US law that probably 
wouldn't work anyway?

Great plan!
Ian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBLNmYQtgxRWSmsqwRAvmsAJwLa+5mMKeNBW9qANRhVNkRB6oWEgCcDS67
mUpk/WKXthcbK+s+CgRSjRI=
=crvD
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] RE: anonymity(NOT)

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25 Aug 2004, at 17:59, Newsbyte wrote:
Such a tool would BY DEFINITION not be open source. And if it had to 
>run
in its own JVM there would be a major performance cost at least on 
older
JVMs.
No, it wouldn't. In the sense of a GPL'ed Open source project, it 
would, but
that's not the only licence possible for Open Source. It's perfectly
possible to make the code public and open source, but make a 
reservation in
your licence that it may not be used to (make a tool to) circumvent the
encryption.
Not according to section 6 of the Open Source definition:
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in 
a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the 
program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic 
research.

See: http://opensource.org/docs/definition.php
Ian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBLNQzQtgxRWSmsqwRAnPrAJ0bJq+470CQu57HBX/30a0wytPyvgCfTZJR
SL9xCsZlR2lJ7ig9WVIYEE0=
=Dhmw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Questions from a potential client writer

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 24 Aug 2004, at 18:24, Nick Tarleton wrote:
On Aug 23, 2004 8:04 PM, Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hate to say it, but if you are that timid then I suggest you run a
mile from Freenet and anything like it.
Indeed, it seems I should. Running a Freenet node could easily get one 
sued for contributory copyright infringement.
I don't think so, who would sue you?
Ian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBLFqFQtgxRWSmsqwRAgwcAJ0eDy+8yXCLvShwDJq6BO32uVCE1wCeLK/o
CNzIeKGijYqZuu77BWz5vRE=
=QOCC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Questions from a potential client writer

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 24 Aug 2004, at 00:23, Nick Tarleton wrote:
On Monday 23 August 2004 04:05 pm, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 23 Aug 2004, at 19:16, Nick Tarleton wrote:
I'm contemplating writing a FUQID-like program for Linux/KDE, and I'd
like to know a couple of answers first:
1. Is there ANY CHANCE AT ALL that I could get in legal trouble, 
under
current US law, for creating and publishing a Freenet client?
In short "yes", just as the answer to "Is there ANY CHANCE AT ALL that
I could get struck by lightening?" would also be "yes".  Could you get
sued?  Yes.  Could they win the suit?  Maybe, but the recent 9th
Circuit Court ruling in the Grokster case makes this less likely.
The best advice I can give is to read this:
   http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/p2p_copyright_wp.php
Uh, never mind. It seems I would have no plausible deniability, as 
everyone
knows a lot (most?) of the large file traffic on Freenet is in 
violation of
copyright.
You might have, but you certainly don't after saying that on a public 
mailing list.

 Even if this would never hold up in court, I don't want to risk
even getting a lawsuit threat/C&D letter.
I hate to say it, but if you are that timid then I suggest you run a 
mile from Freenet and anything like it.

(BTW, I don't think the INDUCE Act will ever pass, and if it did, it 
wouldn't
last long - can you imagine what The Public would think if MP3 player 
makers
- big companies, not Jon Johansens - were hauled to court en masse?)
Unfortunately the real damage of the Induce Act would likely occur 
during private meetings between entrepreneurs and their potential 
investors, rather than in public court proceedings.  It won't be easy 
for the public to see that they have been denied the next iPod if they 
never knew that it might have existed in the first place.

Ian. 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFBKoX9QtgxRWSmsqwRAj5uAJ9dI8ys2M6nTc822t49H3OLlmKFEACfbm94
2LVPYi6MpolnwQN29Jk9f3o=
=G66h
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Questions from a potential client writer

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 23 Aug 2004, at 19:16, Nick Tarleton wrote:
I'm contemplating writing a FUQID-like program for Linux/KDE, and I'd  
like to know a couple of answers first:

1. Is there ANY CHANCE AT ALL that I could get in legal trouble, under  
current US law, for creating and publishing a Freenet client?
In short "yes", just as the answer to "Is there ANY CHANCE AT ALL that  
I could get struck by lightening?" would also be "yes".  Could you get  
sued?  Yes.  Could they win the suit?  Maybe, but the recent 9th  
Circuit Court ruling in the Grokster case makes this less likely.

The best advice I can give is to read this:
  http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/p2p_copyright_wp.php
Then, if you are *really* feeling enthusiastic, read the Grokster  
ruling:

   
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/ 
20040819_mgm_v_grokster_decision.pdf

And then, before you get too excited, read about the Induce Act:
  http://techlawadvisor.com/induce/
2. Approximately how soon is the change to fixed-size keys expected?  
Approximately how much would this require changing in an existing  
client?
You should direct this question to the development mailing list,  
Matthew is the person to answer it (he also reads this mailing list,  
but I suspect you will catch his attention more easily on devl, and  
this question is on-topic for that mailing list).

Ian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBKk4KQtgxRWSmsqwRAp5BAJ9ZhCjp41ssKm8IAEM52PoAUKTGzgCfT01L
spzUgeBzN5BJ59k3nMto9AA=
=QCYb
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Re: acceptance of freenet - starting points

[Ian Clarke]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 22 Aug 2004, at 07:33, Sven Hoffmann wrote:
i think we have a large problem with
the starting points/bookmarks that are used
on standard installations.
We strive to judge the front-page bookmarks on one criteria and one 
criteria alone: How effectively do they allow people to find the 
information they want.  The index pages that best achieve this are the 
ones to which we link.

We stray from this objective and rational decision process at our 
peril.  If we add new and subjective criteria intended to shield users 
from "unpalatable" content, then we have placed ourselves squarely on a 
slippery slope that could ultimately make us responsible for what 
people can find through the gateway links we provide.  We will have 
thrown away our status as a content agnostic software provider, and 
placed ourselves in the position of endorsing some content, that which 
we link to on the gateway page, while rejecting other content, that 
which we don't.

It is for this reason that your email is misdirected.  The people whom 
you must persuade are the operators of the most effective index sites 
on Freenet.  Much as I might personally prefer that these sites avoided 
linking to certain types of material, it is not for us to exclude them 
from the index page on that basis.

Ian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBKFeYQtgxRWSmsqwRAoKdAJ9iTiHPZn0ifkCmTH9WOGVqhWVn6wCeJVqW
JlApifBmaYUzLSUS4gOT2yI=
=pZcm
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Crossposting to tech

[Ian Clarke]

Please don't cross-post to tech from chat without a good reason (and I 
don't see why any of the recent cross-posts are justified).  If people 
wish to read posts appropriate to chat then they will subscribe to the 
chat mailing list.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: anonymity(NOT)

[Ian Clarke]

On 8 Aug 2004, at 01:49, Matthew Findley wrote:
Ok, I'll admit I was partly wrong.
"Partly"!  That's quite an admission for someone who claimed they would 
be anonymous yet who I was able to tell them the tiny little town they 
lived in with about 20 seconds of research based on the information 
contained in one email :-)

The web is *not* anonymous for any useful definition of the word, and 
it is pretty clear that you lack the technical expertise to say any 
different.  Please have the maturity to admit you were wrong, not 
"partly" wrong, completely 100% wrong.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: anonymity(NOT)

[Ian Clarke]

Really?  Then I guess your ISP must be based in or close to Riverview, 
Florida, which is where your email headers indicate that your email 
originated (and that is using the first IP address locator Google gave 
me, I am sure others are much more accurate).

For your information, most ISPs include the originating IP address in 
the email headers, this, to people with the appropriate resources 
(which is more people than you probably think), is as good as giving 
your name, date of birth, address, and social security number.

Ian.
On 8 Aug 2004, at 00:54, Matthew Findley wrote:
Email headers will only help you track someone down if they're running 
their own mail server.
Unless our friend Mr. Pineapple is the yahoo system admin.
 
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jH3SWZY2IvBsc4poGI7TzuB
Received: from web41307.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.56]) by 
mc8-f10.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824);
  Fri, 6 Aug 2004 22:02:10 -0700
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from [24.72.74.85] by web41307.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 
06 Aug 2004 22:02:10 PDT
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 22:02:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: pineapple <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Re: anonymity(NOT)
To: Matthew Findley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Aug 2004 05:02:10.0366 (UTC) 
FILETIME=[B1F38DE0:01C47C3B]
 
And even if you were able to get my ip address (which you can just as 
easly get from freenet) you would only be able to narrow it down.  
Only your ISP would know who your actualy are.
More importantly this still asumess I'm useing my home computer.  If 
one was really worried about being anonymous there are any number of 
free to use computers with internet connections at librarys and 
collages across the country.
You could also use a wireless laptop and just go to various open 
hotspots.
 
 
Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
 
>
> On 6 Aug 2004, at 19:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The WWW is very anonymous.  If I hadn't used my real name in my 
email
> > address there is no way you could tell who I am.
>
> Thw WWW is anonymous if you are worried about being tracked down by a
> computer illiterate 10 year old.  If you are worried about someone 
more
 > sophisticated than that then the WWW is most certainly not 
anonymous by
 > almost any definition of the word.
>
> By looking at the headers of your email I could find the IP address 
of
> your computer, as could the operator of any website you visit.  Given
> that IP address, it is relatively trivial to find your location (do a
> Google search for "IP address location").  If I had the resources of 
a
> moderately sized corporation, I could also correlate your IP 
addresses
> with one of the many many websites that you have given your name to 
and
> find out all sorts of other things about you.
>
> Ian.
>
  

 
 
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: Showdown at the Freenode Coral

[Ian Clarke]

On 8 Aug 2004, at 01:04, Matthew Findley wrote:
If you could prove to a jury that it is the government who put the 
stuff on freenet you will be perfectly safe.
Last time I checked, the US criminal justice system required proof of 
guilt, not proof of innocence.  Perhaps that all changed with the 
Patriot Act, like almost all of the people that voted for it, I haven't 
personally read it.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] RE: anonymity(NOT)

[Ian Clarke]

On 6 Aug 2004, at 19:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The WWW is very anonymous.  If I hadn't used my real name in my email 
address there is no way you could tell who I am.
Thw WWW is anonymous if you are worried about being tracked down by a 
computer illiterate 10 year old.  If you are worried about someone more 
sophisticated than that then the WWW is most certainly not anonymous by 
almost any definition of the word.

By looking at the headers of your email I could find the IP address of 
your computer, as could the operator of any website you visit.  Given 
that IP address, it is relatively trivial to find your location (do a 
Google search for "IP address location").  If I had the resources of a 
moderately sized corporation, I could also correlate your IP addresses 
with one of the many many websites that you have given your name to and 
find out all sorts of other things about you.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] Showdown at the Freenode Coral

[Ian Clarke]

On 6 Aug 2004, at 18:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The is a big difference in knowing it can happen, and knowing it is 
happening.
I don't think you can be any more or less certain that it is happening 
with Freenet than with the USPS.  I think it is a virtual certainty 
that a given postman will deliver something illegal in the course of 
their career, this may or may not also be true of someone operating a 
Freenet node.

In freenet you know not only that it can happen, but you know it is 
happening (maybe not with 100% certainty, but enough to convince a 
jury I would suspect).
You don't know with any certainty, for any given piece of information, 
that it is happening, all you know is that *something* illegal may pass 
through your node in the course of your running it, but the exact same 
is true of a postman delivering mail.

The reason you are held more accountable for your actions is because 
you are an individual where as the USPS is a huge organization.  It's 
the USPS job to deliver packages, where you are under no obligation to 
run freenet.
A postman is under no obligation to work for the USPS.  It is the USPS 
job to deliver information without reading it, the exact same is true 
of Freenet.  You still haven't demonstrated that under your 
interpretation of the law a postman wouldn't be just as culpable as a 
Freenet node operator.

quote - "You are trying to turn a collection of acts, a small number 
of which may assist someone to do something illegal, into a single act 
of criminal facilitation.  This is clearly not the intent of the law 
and I would be amazed if you can provide any case law to the 
contrary."
Actually you combined the acts.
You are dodging the question, in order for you to apply criminal 
facilitation law to Freenet you must stretch it to apply it to a 
collection of acts where there is a small likelihood that one of those 
acts helps someone do something illegal.

The law was not intended to be applied in this manner, on the contrary, 
it is clear that in most sane legal traditions (and even though some on 
this mailing list might disagree, I am including the US here ;) the 
provision of a service or product to the public which happens to be 
used by someone in the course of breaking the law does not make the 
service or product provider a criminal, even when, as is the case with 
any large service or product provider, it is virtually certain that the 
service or product will be used by a criminal at some point.  This is 
what protects Kinkos, Smith & Wesson, Verizon, and many others from 
criminal liability.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-support] Showdown at the Freenode Coral

[Ian Clarke]

On 6 Aug 2004, at 14:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I gave you a link to the New York state penal code definition of 
criminal facilitation.  Which spells out very clearly that one only 
needs a probable knowledge that his or her actions are allowing for a 
crime to occur.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/nycodes/c82/a25.html
Perhaps I have overlooked one of your emails, but I don't think you 
responded to my point that if the law was interpreted in the manner you 
are suggesting, then postal workers (who must know that there is a 
possibility that the mail they carry contains illegal material) would 
be liable.

Clearly this would be ridiculous, and so I suspect your interpretation 
must be incorrect.

Looking more closely at the case law you cite it isn't hard to see 
fundamental differences which would mean it doesn't apply here (which 
is good news for postal workers and Freenet node operators alike):

Florez knew the person that she was helping, and had specific reason to 
believe that he would use the account illegally, but she did it anyway. 
 In contrast, neither a Freenet node operator nor a postman will 
typically have specific knowledge of the person to whom they are 
delivering a piece of information, and it is reasonable to assume that 
is most cases that person is doing nothing illegal.

In other words, for any given piece of mail or data, the Freenet node 
operator most certainly does not have probable knowledge that they are 
taking part in an illegal activity.  You are trying to turn a 
collection of acts, a small number of which may assist someone to do 
something illegal, into a single act of criminal facilitation.  This is 
clearly not the intent of the law and I would be amazed if you can 
provide any case law to the contrary.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: IIP revival (off topic?)

[Ian Clarke]

Sonax wrote:
I think you would get a much greater effect by setting a good example
you'r self and politly ask people who post off topic to use the relevant
lists, than you get with the aproch you use now.
I am polite in cases where people don't know any better, but in your 
case you knew your post was offtopic and you sent it anyway.

You can't get away from
the fact that you have poted off topic in the past, and that makes it
hard to take you'r criticism seriously.
Whatever, all the examples you cite were at the very least related to 
Freenet, yours was about a third party app that bears no technical 
relationship to Freenet.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

Re: [freenet-chat] Re: IIP revival (off topic?)

[Ian Clarke]

Look, this is indeed getting silly, so perhaps we can relax, extinguish 
the flames, and find some common ground.

Twice in the past a Freenet mailing list has been rendered useless 
through off-topic posts.  The first time was the Chat mailing list 
several years ago which succumbed to flamewars over silly issues I don't 
even remember any more.  This was an annoyance but not really a serious 
problem for the project.  The second was the devl mailing list where 
serious discussion of immediate issues was drowned out by off-topic 
posts forcing the core Freenet developers to conduct most discussion on 
IRC.  Since IRC is much more difficult for people to track, this 
resulted in significant and unnecessary opacity in the development 
process of Freenet which hurt everyone.  It took years for these 
important discussions to return to devl.

I admit that I might sometimes overreact to offtopic posts, but it is in 
an effort to avoid a repetition of this unfortunate situation.  If, by 
making an example of one or two people, I can force people to think 
twice as to whether those subscribed to devl want to read their posts, 
then it will be more than worth-while.  Its a dirty job, but someone has 
to do it.

Ian.
Sonax wrote:
Now this is getting silly (or maby it already was), but my weekend has
started and i have a few hours before i'm going to start drinking, so...

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.devel/14157

"implement a useful new feature or fix a significant bug".  Hits the

nail on the head if you ask me.

Oh, com on. It is clearly implied that the "bugs" and "near-term new
features" from: 

"This list is for active developers to discuss bugs, and the implementation
of near-term new features. Please only post to this list if you know
what you are talking about, otherwise use the tech mailing list"
are to be understood as specific bugs and features. Just writing the
word bug dosn't make you on topic.

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.devel/14125

A map of the global Freenet network may not be specifically related
to 

things we are immediately about to implement, but it remains far more

relevant than an announcement for a non-Freenet related project.

You can't get away from this one. It was off topic! If my post was more
or less off topic won't change that.

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.devel/13879

Whether we can pay Matthew is very related to bugs and near-term 
features since without funds to pay him, our ability to do either is

severely impacted.

And if you have no communication with the comunity you can't get feedback
about new bugs and then Toad cant fix them. See, now my post is on topic...
You can make everything sound on topic if you argument like this.
(And you even admit to the post being off topic at the bottom...)
You can't get away from the fact that you have posted off topic posts
to the list in the past.
Have fun!
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Re: IIP revival (off topic?)

[Ian Clarke]

Now which of the fucking folowing mails do "discuss bugs, and the implementation
of near-term new features"?
2 out of 3 of them do without question, and the one that doesn't is 
certainly closer than  an announcement for a non-Freenet related project.

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.devel/14157
"implement a useful new feature or fix a significant bug".  Hits the 
nail on the head if you ask me.

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.devel/14125
A map of the global Freenet network may not be specifically related to 
things we are immediately about to implement, but it remains far more 
relevant than an announcement for a non-Freenet related project.

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.devel/13879
Whether we can pay Matthew is very related to bugs and near-term 
features since without funds to pay him, our ability to do either is 
severely impacted.

or did they in fact belong to tech or chat (or...)?
Two were appropriate for devl, one was debatable, but all were far more 
appropriate than an announcement for software unrelated to Freenet.

So I fucking win with a score of 3 to 1.
I make it me 1 you 0.
Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-dev] IIP revival (off topic?)

[Ian Clarke]

Toad wrote:
Flamewar can continue on chat. Personally I think the first message was
perfectly valid and Ian's response wasn't.
Let me clarify for you since you are clearly unfamiliar with the remit 
of this mailing list as outlined on our website.  "This list is for 
active developers to discuss bugs, and the implementation of near-term 
new features".  Implied in that very clear sentence is that 
announcements or requests for participation in non-Freenet projects are 
absolutely and positively not appropriate.

But if you want to talk about
it, DO SO ON CHAT. I am the moderator and I apologize for contributing
to this thread, however, criticising me for that *here* will just
exacerbate the problem, so TAKE IT TO CHAT OR PRIVATE EMAIL. And I mean
Ian here as well as Sonax, who has already taken his responses to chat.
I agree that it is unfortunate that you had to turn this into a 
flamefest, but if it forces people to be more considerate in the future 
then it will be worth the short term inconvenience.

Ian.
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-dev] IIP revival (off topic?)

[Ian Clarke]

Why the fuck are you spamming the development list with this?
Every time someone inconsiderately decides to spam this with offtopic 
posts (and no, saying the email is off topic in the subject is no 
excuse) we get one step closer to restricting post privileges to those 
that can exercise some self control and consideration for others.

Ian.
Sonax wrote:
The author of this freesite [EMAIL PROTECTED],JD2L-
DGN~nAZTqVI2PCIkg/iiprevival/2// says he is ready to launche a IIP server,
 but he needs public relays. Thought maby some people on this list could
help...
I felt that a lot of people wanted IIP back, but the support for this
guy has not yet been that overwhelming. He needs about 10-20 nodes.
From the site:
"
2004-06-10
So far I got a few NIMs and also a few messages in Frost encouraging
me to proceed. But with a total of 6 or 7 responses and around 3 offers
for public relays this is far from what would make an IRC network usefull
at all. So unless I do get significantly more positive responses, I will
drop that attempt. I will listen both to the NIMs on this page and the
Frost board for about another week for further replies.
"
So if you think you can run such a public relay this is the needed information:
host="Put your host here"
port="Put your port here"
publickey="Put your public key here"
Go to the site and post a nim, go to the frost iip board (no keys), post
to this list (or to chat if you fear the wrath of Ian ;-) or mail them
to me and i shal make shure they end up the right place. 

Now let's get IIP back!
(To the gmane people, that is SSK (at) REMsW1qIViD71EovZVsZPy5mZUoPAgM,
JD2L-DGN~nAZTqVI2PCIkg/iiprevival/2//)
Have fun!
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
___
chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general

[freenet-chat] Anyone got a fast server we could use?

[Ian Clarke]

The Watchme stuff is really slowing down Hawk, we need to move it to 
another server.

Basically, the software requirements are:
  * Perl
  * PostgreSQL (we could port to another database if absolutely 
necessary)
  * GraphViz
  * ImageMagick
  * Apache (or equivolent)

The hardware requirements are:
  * Reasonably fast machine (watchme makes heavy use of database)

The network requirements are:
  * Fast connection (minimum T1 - Home broadband won't cut it)
  * Ability to accept incoming TCP connections (this is why we can't
just use Sourceforge)

We would need a user account on this machine (logins by ssh), with a 
public_html folder and cgi enabled.  Only trusted developers would be 
given access to the user account.

Is anyone in a position to donate these resources to the project?  If so 
- send me an email at [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01414/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[freenet-chat] Another Watchme upgrade

[Ian Clarke]

Just fixed another Watchme bug - most grateful if watchme users could 
upgrade.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01408/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [freenet-chat] Automatic /. mirroring on Freenet

[Ian Clarke]

On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 09:21:56AM +, Revenant wrote:
>   The "slashdot effect" describes when a website is brought down by the 
> sudden influx of traffic caused by a referral on Slashdot.org.  

I am aware of that.

>   Mirroring slashdot itself wouldn't really help with this.  You'd have 
> to mirror every site referred to as soon as an article referring to it 
> was posted, as the slashdot effect tends to hit within an hour or so of 
> the referral being posted.

That is what I was suggesting, sorry if it was unclear.

Ian.

--
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01393/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[freenet-chat] Automatic /. mirroring on Freenet

[Ian Clarke]

Someone should definitely explore the possibility of setting-up an 
automatic /. mirror on Freenet - to help address the serious problem of 
the /. effect.  Slashdot's excuses in their FAQ for not setting up a 
cache are pretty lame, almost every ISP uses caches of one form or 
another, as does Google, and as far as I know, nobody complains about 
it.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01346/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-dev] Graphing watchme output

[Ian Clarke]

Of particular relevance is the "Dot" language:

  http://www.research.att.com/~erg/graphviz/info/lang.html

On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 11:42:27AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> If anyone out there fancies putting their Perl, Python, or 
> whatever skills to an easy but interesting problem, how about 
> writing something which isolates a single message from the watchme 
> logs (at http://hawk.freenetproject.org/~watchme/logs) and uses it 
> to produce some input for something like Graphviz 
> (http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/graphviz/)?

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01293/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[freenet-chat] Graphing watchme output

[Ian Clarke]

If anyone out there fancies putting their Perl, Python, or 
whatever skills to an easy but interesting problem, how about 
writing something which isolates a single message from the watchme 
logs (at http://hawk.freenetproject.org/~watchme/logs) and uses it 
to produce some input for something like Graphviz 
(http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/graphviz/)?

Any takers?

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01292/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [freenet-chat] WatchMe functionality ready for some initial testing

[Ian Clarke]

On Sun, May 26, 2002 at 09:16:48AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Ian Clarke ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> 
> > Ok, my first cut at the "watchme" functionality is ready for beta 
> > testing.  I have done some preliminary testing and all seems to be 
> > working as-expected.
> 
> I think what's missing here, for the benefit of those of us who are
> not on the devl list, is a basic description of what "watchme" is,
> what it does, how running it will benefit the Freenet project, etc.

Apologies, it was described a few weeks ago.  Take a look at:

  http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/twiki/view/Main/SpyWare

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01281/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [freenet-chat] WatchMe functionality ready for some initial testing

[Ian Clarke]

On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 05:53:00PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> Ok, my first cut at the "watchme" functionality is ready for beta 
> testing.  I have done some preliminary testing and all seems to be 
> working as-expected.

Ok, an added instruction - if you are overwriting a non-watchme 
node distribution, be sure to delete the pre-existing node_ 
file.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01278/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [freenet-chat] WatchMe functionality ready for some initial testing

[Ian Clarke]

For those who would like to view the logs as they come in, you now can at
  http://hawk.freenetproject.org/~watchme/logs/

Each file is the logs reported by a different node (filenames are 
the node's IP address).

Right now we only have two nodes, one of which is mine - COME ON 
PEOPLE!

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01277/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[freenet-chat] WatchMe functionality ready for some initial testing

[Ian Clarke]

Ok, my first cut at the "watchme" functionality is ready for beta 
testing.  I have done some preliminary testing and all seems to be 
working as-expected.

To use it: 

1) Download a fresh snapshot (you probably won't want to overwrite
   your current Freenet node, the snapshot available as-of this email 
   should work fine)

2) Generate the freenet.conf file as normal.

3) Add a line to your freenet.conf file with "watchme=true"

4) Download a seednodes file from:
 http://hawk.freenetproject.org/~watchme/seednodes.ref

NOTE: The normal seednodes file will be useless since watchme nodes 
  won't talk to normal nodes.

5) Export your seeds file - type the following in the "freenet-xxx" 
   directory:
 $ java -cp lib/freenet.jar:lib/freenet-ext.jar freenet.node.Main -x myRef.ref

6) Send the file myRef.ref to me so that I can add it to the watchme 
   seednodes.ref file

7) Run your node as normal

8) Try to use your node in a similar way that you do normally, but 
   remember that you have no expectation of anonymity whatsoever 
   (although it would still require a-little effort to figure out what 
   you are doing).

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01276/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [freenet-chat] PRIORITY MAIL

[Ian Clarke]

diately I receive your  positive
> >response.
> >
> >Thanks in anticipation for your positive response.
> >yours faithfully.
> >Dr. SULEIMON TAFIDA
> >
> >(Director-NNPC)
> >--
> >
> >
> >___
> >chat mailing list
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
> 
> 
> _
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
> 
> 
> ___
> chat mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01265/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Chat] Mailing lists migrated to newer version of mailman

[Ian Clarke]

I have upgraded our mailing-list software, MailMan, from version 2.0.3 to
2.0.9. Unfortunately I had to recreate the mailing lists, so people may
want to re-request their passwords and reconfigure their accounts if they
had made changes to the default configuration. Sorry :-(

Better still, we are now using the debian version of mailman rather than a 
custom-installed version which will make future upgrades much easier.

I will try to convert the old archives over soon.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
Personal Homepage   http://locut.us/



msg01258/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[freenet-chat] Houdini Keys

[Ian Clarke]

On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 10:42:00PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>  a) Keys are vanishing from the data store

Very interesting indeed, when I saw your graphs for the first time, I 
assumed it was due to you resetting your datastore.

I might say that this was due to a large piece of data being added to the 
datastore and flushing out most of the data, but I changed the DataStore 
code to prevent that over a year ago IIRC.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarkeian at freenetproject.org
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20020309/2a9cdbc8/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-tech] Re: Crash in new Fred code?

[Ian Clarke]

On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 02:34:40AM +1300, David McNab wrote:
> Re-code the whole fucking thing in C or C++ !!!

You seriously believe that writing software in C++ is faster than 
writing software in Java?  I have never met anyone equally familiar with 
both C++ and Java who would agree with you.  The simple fact that you 
don't need to worry about bounds-checking in Java alone gets rid of a 
significant percentage of bugs which plague C++ software.

> And clean up the design in the process.

What is wrong with the design?  Sure, it isn't perfect, but I am curious 
as to what specific suggestions you have (you obviously have some if you 
are implying that there are serious flaws in the current design).

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarkeian at freenetproject.org
Founder & Coordinator, The Freenet Projecthttp://freenetproject.org/
Chief Technology Officer, Uprizer Inc.   http://www.uprizer.com/
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20020306/118dc6b8/attachment.pgp>