Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
- Original Message - From: "David McNab" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now! > > Question: Did you seperate presentation and functionality > > like a good OO designer? > > To a fair extent, yes. I've given it a try. > But after a 7 year break from programming, I've only recently started > converting my thinking from structured design/programming to OO, and > switching from C to C++, so while I've tried to achieve a reasonable level > of encapsulation, you will inevitably find faults with the design. > > For instance, classes don't follow a strict hierarchy - they tend to invoke > each other willy-nilly. This is probably sacrilegous to OO purists. Don't worry, I'm hardly an OO purist. Also, GTK+ is basicly all written in plain C, but is still very object oreinted, which is good. ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
I'm in irc.debian.org#freenet Got time for a quick chat? - Original Message - From: "Ian Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now! ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:20:46AM +1200, David McNab wrote: > Which is why I'm keen to take up Brandon's suggestion about multiple DNS > registries, and empowering anyone to become a DNS registrar. I don't want to > be held responsible for content on FreeWeb. But then you lose the benefits of a unified namespace. I really think that this additional layer is an ugly kludge, and creates far more problems than it is worth. For me it ruins an otherwise excellent piece of software, and my advice is to strip it out, and forget about it. > But did you read in my earlier reply about the 'fwgetdns' utility, which > *anyone* can run, and which bypasses me completely in loading DNS records > into the user's own local DNS cache? Again, that is spammable. > Here again is where the multiple registries system will offer some remedies. > If one key index is being spammed, it can be blacklisted in favour of > cleaner registries. But this still adds a whole new level of complexity to the process of reaching sites in Freenet, and relying on multiple registries loses the unified namespace which even the much-maligned KSKs benefit from. > >It is also totally unnescessary, if people want friendly ways > >to access their sites in Freenet, why not use KSKs - that is what they > >are there for? > > The first pre-alpha used strictly KSKs, and had no 'registry' system - I got > shot down by others for using inherently insecure key types. > Milking inform.php and doing htl=1 inserts of a KSK all over the place can > take down a site, or result in another site appearing in its place. People have a choice, they can either pass around insecure but user-readable KSKs, or pass around secure key-types such as SSKs or CHKs. > It's a bit of a brain rattler, how to come up with a translation path which > can render a short human-readable string into a secure Freenet key: > 1) With no hazard to anonymity > 2) Without relying on out-of-band means such as mainstream websites > 3) With no vulnerability in the security or accessibility of the translation > path If people want to render a human readable string into a secure Freenet key then they should use KSKs, and accept the risk. If they don't want to accept this risk, then they should pass around SSKs. Simple. > SSKs are tight and secure keys, but can't be written to without the use of a > private key. Revealing this private key makes them as insecure as KSKs. I have no idea what you are getting at here. The whole point is that SSKs can't be written to without the use of a private key. If you are talking about some form of submission mechanism then KSKs are perfectly well suited to that. > If you, Ian, or anyone else can suggest something better, I'd love to hear > it, and put it into the next FreeWeb release. Easy. Stick with SSKs. They have been working fine to-date, are secure, and don't break compatibility with existing freenet clients. Your mechanism is a solution that doesn't really solve a problem, but creates plenty. Ian. PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
From: "Ian Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >This additional layer is unnescessary and encourages incompatabilities >since only FreeWeb users will be able to access sites which are >advertised with a .free domain - where as it would be trivial to make >FreeWeb 100% compatable with existing tools by abandoning this >mechanism. Not true. The name of the existing DNS index is freeweb0.1a-1 The entries on that index are machine-parseable, in the form: freeweb:site-ssk-public-key/SSKpath:site description Any, repeat, *ANY*, freenet user can surf FreeWeb sites. David ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
From: "Ian Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Ok, but this basically gives the controller of that private key (namely >you) the power to censor any sites which are linked to via your DNS >mechanism (by refusing to copy them into the private subspace). Which is why I'm keen to take up Brandon's suggestion about multiple DNS registries, and empowering anyone to become a DNS registrar. I don't want to be held responsible for content on FreeWeb. But did you read in my earlier reply about the 'fwgetdns' utility, which *anyone* can run, and which bypasses me completely in loading DNS records into the user's own local DNS cache? > The >system could also be shut down by spamming the submission key index. >This defeats the whole point of Freenet. Here again is where the multiple registries system will offer some remedies. If one key index is being spammed, it can be blacklisted in favour of cleaner registries. >It is also totally unnescessary, if people want friendly ways >to access their sites in Freenet, why not use KSKs - that is what they >are there for? The first pre-alpha used strictly KSKs, and had no 'registry' system - I got shot down by others for using inherently insecure key types. Milking inform.php and doing htl=1 inserts of a KSK all over the place can take down a site, or result in another site appearing in its place. The Chinese government woul just *love* that if they see Falun Gong sites appearing on freeweb. >This additional layer is unnescessary and encourages incompatabilities >since only FreeWeb users will be able to access sites which are >advertised with a .free domain - where as it would be trivial to make >FreeWeb 100% compatable with existing tools by abandoning this >mechanism. Again, refer to the discussion in my earlier reply about the fwgetdns utility. Lastly, Ian and others, I do hear your concerns. It's a bit of a brain rattler, how to come up with a translation path which can render a short human-readable string into a secure Freenet key: 1) With no hazard to anonymity 2) Without relying on out-of-band means such as mainstream websites 3) With no vulnerability in the security or accessibility of the translation path KSKs are wonderful for this, but highly vulnerable to htl=1 attack. SSKs are tight and secure keys, but can't be written to without the use of a private key. Revealing this private key makes them as insecure as KSKs. I propose that the final system work via multiple DNS registries, with each user free to select the order in which the registries are searched. This seems the best compromise - an 'arms race' scenario, whereby new clean DNS registries pop up as fast as older registries get spammed into uselessness. If you, Ian, or anyone else can suggest something better, I'd love to hear it, and put it into the next FreeWeb release. Cheers David ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
> Question: Did you seperate presentation and functionality > like a good OO designer? To a fair extent, yes. I've given it a try. But after a 7 year break from programming, I've only recently started converting my thinking from structured design/programming to OO, and switching from C to C++, so while I've tried to achieve a reasonable level of encapsulation, you will inevitably find faults with the design. For instance, classes don't follow a strict hierarchy - they tend to invoke each other willy-nilly. This is probably sacrilegous to OO purists. FreeWeb Agent, which was written fully in C, with some bits chopped from elsewhere and stitched together Frankenstein-style, is going in the bin. I'll be rewriting it from scratch in full C++. I'll even create a C++ wrapper class to encapsulate the use of the ezFCPlib C library I'm writing. FreeWeb Publisher is mostly C++, and should make more sense. But it will go through some major changes as well. Particularly the complete elimination of *all* use of JNI. David - Original Message - From: "Timm Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 1:56 AM Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now! > > David McNab wrote on 4/29/01 5:30 pm: > > >From: "Ian Clarke" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >rg> > > > >Thanks for your questions, > >Ian. > >Please take the time to > >digest my response. > > > >>I have some concerns over > >this approach. What is > >required for someone to > >>access FreeWeb? I get the > >impression that it: > >>* Is Windows only > > > >I've had reports of it working > >in Linux under Wine. But > >that's not an excuse. > >I have only recently learned > >some of the basics of > >Windows GUI programming, > >and know nothing about > >native Linux GUI. To run > >there, much or most of it will > >need to be re-written for > >(say) KDE or Gnome. You'll > >note from the website > >(http://freeweb.sourceforg > >e.net) that I'm inviting > >experienced KDE and Mac > >programmers. > > OK, I knew I would have to learn GTK++ at some point, so it > might as well be now. That will get anyone with GTK++ installed > working with it (including people running KDE and even some > Windows and Mac users (I think)). > > Question: Did you seperate presentation and functionality > like a good OO designer? > > > Timm Murray > > --- > Theory is when you know how it works, but fails. Practice is when something > works, but you don't know why. Here, Theory and Practice come together. > Nothing works, and nobody knows why. > > ___ > Chat mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat > ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 12:28:16PM +1200, David McNab wrote: > When a site is published, a DNS record with the site's SSK public key and > the site's domain name is written to this key index. A 'DNS daemon' harvests > these records and writes them to another SSK - the FreeWeb DNS SSK, whose > public key is hard-wired into the FreeWeb software. I trust that I'm not > going to be asked to explain why the FreeWeb DNS SSK's private key is not > also built into FreeWeb ;) Ok, but this basically gives the controller of that private key (namely you) the power to censor any sites which are linked to via your DNS mechanism (by refusing to copy them into the private subspace). The system could also be shut down by spamming the submission key index. This defeats the whole point of Freenet. It is also totally unnescessary, if people want friendly ways to access their sites in Freenet, why not use KSKs - that is what they are there for? This additional layer is unnescessary and encourages incompatabilities since only FreeWeb users will be able to access sites which are advertised with a .free domain - where as it would be trivial to make FreeWeb 100% compatable with existing tools by abandoning this mechanism. Ian. PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
David McNab wrote on 4/29/01 5:30 pm: >From: "Ian Clarke" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED] >rg> > >Thanks for your questions, >Ian. >Please take the time to >digest my response. > >>I have some concerns over >this approach. What is >required for someone to >>access FreeWeb? I get the >impression that it: >>* Is Windows only > >I've had reports of it working >in Linux under Wine. But >that's not an excuse. >I have only recently learned >some of the basics of >Windows GUI programming, >and know nothing about >native Linux GUI. To run >there, much or most of it will >need to be re-written for >(say) KDE or Gnome. You'll >note from the website >(http://freeweb.sourceforg >e.net) that I'm inviting >experienced KDE and Mac >programmers. OK, I knew I would have to learn GTK++ at some point, so it might as well be now. That will get anyone with GTK++ installed working with it (including people running KDE and even some Windows and Mac users (I think)). Question: Did you seperate presentation and functionality like a good OO designer? Timm Murray --- Theory is when you know how it works, but fails. Practice is when something works, but you don't know why. Here, Theory and Practice come together. Nothing works, and nobody knows why. ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
From: "Ian Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thanks for your questions, Ian. Please take the time to digest my response. >I have some concerns over this approach. What is required for someone to >access FreeWeb? I get the impression that it: >* Is Windows only I've had reports of it working in Linux under Wine. But that's not an excuse. I have only recently learned some of the basics of Windows GUI programming, and know nothing about native Linux GUI. To run there, much or most of it will need to be re-written for (say) KDE or Gnome. You'll note from the website (http://freeweb.sourceforge.net) that I'm inviting experienced KDE and Mac programmers. If no-one steps forward, then I'll go ahead in time and learn KDE GUI programming myself and cut a Linux version. As for a Mac version - that'll take longer, since I don't have a Mac and am hard put to justify purchasing one. There is absolutely *NO* intention of it remaining Windows-only. Windows is just a convenient platform for the initial proof-of-concept, which this alpha release essentially is. >* Is closed source (I find the argument that the code is too disorgainised > to release yet to be somewhat unconvincing) FreeWeb uses JNI to invoke Freenet java methods, particularly CLI clients, and freenetmirror. Note that it sets the "freenet.CLI.library" flag, which has been removed in the latest release of Freenet - without this flag, FreeWeb will fall over in the middle of publishing sites. (I did ask on dev for the library flag to be left intact for a while - this was ignored) Thus, FreeWeb requires a retrograde Freenet - 0.3.7.0 thru 0.3.8.1, or else it won't work. :(( Currently I'm developing an FCP C library called ezFCPlib, a portable, programmer-friendly API, which will replace the whole back end. Expected time of implementation (with support of much of the old and new freenet metadata) is one week. On the surfing side, FreeWeb uses FProxy - I'm also to replace the proxy's back end with calls to ezFCPlib, and am rewriting 80% of the proxy server code (in response to complaints of the proxy code blocking cookies, plus my total dissatisfaction at the present state of the proxy code). I could release source now, but it won't work with latest freenet, also, it will have little architectural resemblance to what FreeWeb is very shortly to become. The source as it stands will be misleading. Plus, it will encourage bad freenet programming practice. But if people find the delay in source release unacceptable, even given the above, I'll release it. Be warned though - it's a mess. I'd probably put it out in a 'daily zip' format. I would much rather put it out when I've done the migration to FCP. In medium and longer term, what's the problem with a slight initial delay. One year from now, who's gonna give a damn that I took 3 or 4 weeks to release source? >* Relies on some central DNS server to convert .free domains to FProxy > domains That is *NOT* true! FreeWeb includes a program called 'fwgetdns', which reads all the keys in the FreeWeb in-freenet keyindex and converts them into DNS records for a user's local cache. The doco explicitly tells the user how to delete this cache, in situations where privacy of access to their PC may be compromised. Therefore, this 'some central DNS server' is a convenience, not a requirement. When a site is published, a DNS record with the site's SSK public key and the site's domain name is written to this key index. A 'DNS daemon' harvests these records and writes them to another SSK - the FreeWeb DNS SSK, whose public key is hard-wired into the FreeWeb software. I trust that I'm not going to be asked to explain why the FreeWeb DNS SSK's private key is not also built into FreeWeb ;) I am in total agreement with Brandon's supportive correspondence, and will be adding a facility whereby anyone can set themself up as a DNS registry. In this scenario, FreeWeb DNS registrars would be encouraged to enable their registries to harvest all records from all other registries, so that every registry ideally has all records. Also, end surfers can nominate a 'hit order' for registries - for all .free requests, they can nominate the search order among the available registries. If one registry starts suffering DOS attacks, say, users can drop that registry from their list. Now that's another topic - FreeWeb DNS is totally vulnerable to DOS attack if the name of the key index is easily known. But the only alternative is to use some out-of-band means for DNS registration. >* Mandates that anyone who wishes to use a .free domain uses FreeWeb, thus > forcing them to tolerate the above-mentioned restrictions. I can see how one could form such a perception. That is certainly *not* the intention. To allay fear and loathing, I'll put up an algorithm document which will allow anyone to access FreeWeb. But you don't even need this. To publish sites to .free, and to surf such sites, all anyone needs to know is: 1) the in-freenet key ind
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 05:29:26PM +1200, David McNab wrote: > I need a site SSK public key for each of these. > > So for each domain you submit, you'll need to have a pre-existing site at: > 'freenet:MSK@SSK@somedamnsskpublickey/domainname//' > > For example, if you want microsoft.free, I'll need you to create a DBR-based > MSK site: > freenet:MSK@SSK@my-ssk-public-key/microsoft// > Note - omit the '.free' from your subkey! > > Note also - FreeWeb uses freenetmirror as its upload engine, so any site > uploaded with freenetmirror is compatible (as long as it uses DBR). I have some concerns over this approach. What is required for someone to access FreeWeb? I get the impression that it: * Is Windows only * Is closed source (I find the argument that the code is too disorgainised to release yet to be somewhat unconvincing) * Relies on some central DNS server to convert .free domains to FProxy domains * Mandates that anyone who wishes to use a .free domain uses FreeWeb, thus forcing them to tolerate the above-mentioned restrictions. FreeWeb seems to add a very thin layer around Freenet, and freenetmirror, but in the process adds a number of rather undesirable requirements. Can you clarify this David? Ian. PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:50:20PM -0500, Owen Williams wrote: > On 23 Apr 2001 00:48:24 -0400, Travis Bemann wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:50:15PM -0400, Tavin Cole wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:44:27PM -0700, Mr . Bad wrote: > > > > > "DM" == David McNab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > DM> For example, Mr Bad, how would you like people to be able to > > > > DM> click on: www.pigdog.free ? > > > > nbc.free > > > mcdonalds.free > > > coke.free > > > cocacola.free > > > coca-cola.free > > > microsoft.free > > > intel.free > > > freenetproject.free > > > markjroberts.free > > LOL > > > lesbiansnails.free > > > rebirthing.free > > Why do I get the idea that ICANN wouldn't like the idea of people > setting up their own top-level domains? Fuck ICANN. So what if they don't like the idea of people setting up their own top-level domains. -- Yes, I know my enemies. They're the teachers who tell me to fight me. Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission, ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, the elite. All of which are American dreams. - Rage Against The Machine PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
I need a site SSK public key for each of these. So for each domain you submit, you'll need to have a pre-existing site at: 'freenet:MSK@SSK@somedamnsskpublickey/domainname//' For example, if you want microsoft.free, I'll need you to create a DBR-based MSK site: freenet:MSK@SSK@my-ssk-public-key/microsoft// Note - omit the '.free' from your subkey! Note also - FreeWeb uses freenetmirror as its upload engine, so any site uploaded with freenetmirror is compatible (as long as it uses DBR). Cheers David - Original Message - From: "Tavin Cole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 3:50 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now! > On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:44:27PM -0700, Mr . Bad wrote: > > >>>>> "DM" == David McNab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > DM> For example, Mr Bad, how would you like people to be able to > > DM> click on: www.pigdog.free ? > > > > Sure! Why not? > > > > Sorry, but this FreeWeb thing is zinging way over my head. I guess I > > don't quite understand it. But OK! Sounds fine! > > > > Definitely got the buzz going on Slashdot, for example. > > I'll take the following domains please: > > nbc.free > mcdonalds.free > coke.free > cocacola.free > coca-cola.free > microsoft.free > intel.free > freenetproject.free > markjroberts.free > lesbiansnails.free > rebirthing.free > > -- > > # tavin cole > # > # "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect, > # a continual flight from wonder." > # - Albert Einstein > > > ___ > Chat mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat > ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 12:14:35AM -0500, Owen Williams wrote: > On 23 Apr 2001 01:02:19 -0400, Tavin Cole wrote: > > > > Why do I get the idea that ICANN wouldn't like the idea of people > > > setting up their own top-level domains? > > > > Never you mind that, because ICANN and he did! > > > > > hehehe now everyone go use my software because it has no single > point of failure and works and stuff! > > http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~ogwilliams/FreeSearch/ > > owen Well, you forgot the one really big single point of failure... Freenet! -- # tavin cole # # "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect, # a continual flight from wonder." # - Albert Einstein ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:50:20PM -0500, Owen Williams wrote: > On 23 Apr 2001 00:48:24 -0400, Travis Bemann wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:50:15PM -0400, Tavin Cole wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:44:27PM -0700, Mr . Bad wrote: > > > > > "DM" == David McNab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > DM> For example, Mr Bad, how would you like people to be able to > > > > DM> click on: www.pigdog.free ? > > > > nbc.free > > > mcdonalds.free > > > coke.free > > > cocacola.free > > > coca-cola.free > > > microsoft.free > > > intel.free > > > freenetproject.free > > > markjroberts.free > > LOL > > > lesbiansnails.free > > > rebirthing.free > > Why do I get the idea that ICANN wouldn't like the idea of people > setting up their own top-level domains? Never you mind that, because ICANN and he did! -- # tavin cole # # "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect, # a continual flight from wonder." # - Albert Einstein ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:50:15PM -0400, Tavin Cole wrote: > On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:44:27PM -0700, Mr . Bad wrote: > > > "DM" == David McNab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > DM> For example, Mr Bad, how would you like people to be able to > > DM> click on: www.pigdog.free ? > > > > Sure! Why not? > > > > Sorry, but this FreeWeb thing is zinging way over my head. I guess I > > don't quite understand it. But OK! Sounds fine! > > > > Definitely got the buzz going on Slashdot, for example. > > I'll take the following domains please: > > nbc.free > mcdonalds.free > coke.free > cocacola.free > coca-cola.free > microsoft.free > intel.free > freenetproject.free > markjroberts.free LOL > lesbiansnails.free > rebirthing.free -- Yes, I know my enemies. They're the teachers who tell me to fight me. Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission, ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, the elite. All of which are American dreams. - Rage Against The Machine PGP signature
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:44:27PM -0700, Mr . Bad wrote: > > "DM" == David McNab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > DM> For example, Mr Bad, how would you like people to be able to > DM> click on: www.pigdog.free ? > > Sure! Why not? > > Sorry, but this FreeWeb thing is zinging way over my head. I guess I > don't quite understand it. But OK! Sounds fine! > > Definitely got the buzz going on Slashdot, for example. I'll take the following domains please: nbc.free mcdonalds.free coke.free cocacola.free coca-cola.free microsoft.free intel.free freenetproject.free markjroberts.free lesbiansnails.free rebirthing.free -- # tavin cole # # "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect, # a continual flight from wonder." # - Albert Einstein ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Attn - all freenet site authors - grab your FreeWeb domains now!
> "DM" == David McNab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DM> For example, Mr Bad, how would you like people to be able to DM> click on: www.pigdog.free ? Sure! Why not? Sorry, but this FreeWeb thing is zinging way over my head. I guess I don't quite understand it. But OK! Sounds fine! Definitely got the buzz going on Slashdot, for example. ~Mr. Bad -- ~ Mr. Bad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/ freenet:MSK@SSK@u1AntQcZ81Y4c2tJKd1M87cZvPoQAge/pigdog+journal// "Statements like this give the impression that this article was written by a madman in a drug induced rage" -- Ben Franklin ~ ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
