[freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to > FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. Wtf -- my computer clock has jumped a few months. It's April already? (JavaScript is pure evil -- it is at the root of much of website-evil -- in ten years when it becomes extinct, people will look back at these years, at how ugly and disfunctional and anti-user and mouse-centric and cpu-draining we made life for ourselves, and shiver at the thought of human potential. My main browser doesn't support JavaScript. I have to be pulled by the teeth to open up Midori or Firefox on asshole-websites, and pretty much every time my CPU skyrockets to 100% and my fingers start bleeding on my touchpad, hovering over all the retarded elusive god-damned popup menus.) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to > FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. Frost/FMS/etc get around the latency/loading issue by background-working "subscriptions". Why not just implement something more along those lines -- expanding on the Bookmarks idea. That way the freesites people read are pretty instantly available, and updated. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
I'm fine with js being used, but it should deprecate gracefully. As a previous poster noted, it's where 99% of browser exploits come through. Ringo On 10/15/2010 12:07 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote: > On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: >> We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a >> browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful >> (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to >> FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. > > Frost/FMS/etc get around the latency/loading issue by background-working > "subscriptions". Why not just implement something more along those > lines -- expanding on the Bookmarks idea. That way the freesites people > read are pretty instantly available, and updated. > ___ > Support mailing list > Support@freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
It's a no for me. I'm not at all against JavaScript, and it's safe to enable it in incognito mode (or when using a separate Firefox profile for Freenet). The problem is that some users won't enable JS no matter what, and some others won't be able to (e.g. because they are using a non-conventional browser). And we shouldn't neglect FProxy's accessibility. _If_ there will be a way to use FProxy without JavaScript (and your message suggests the opposite), then I think everyone will agree with me that it's okay. On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote: > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a browser > supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful (feel free to make > further comments). I will post a similar poll to FMS. I suggest somebody does > Frost, I personally don't use Frost. > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support@freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
Matthew Toseland schreef: We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. No, no no and eeehm... no. Is this a recipe to stir things up at the mailing list? MUST be some kinda joke. I'm nothing like a programmer but also I know to steer clear of javascript if I value anonymity. Twenty seven proxies on a string are all useless if javascript is enabled. The moment javascript is required, FN is gone from my system. Only thing I trust javascript at, is it doing things I don't want. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 16:29 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a browser > supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful (feel free to make > further comments). I will post a similar poll to FMS. I suggest somebody does > Frost, I personally don't use Frost. No. But then again, you haven't made a case for it. Plead your case and ask again. > ___ > Support mailing list > Support@freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 21:45:32 +0200, Romain Dalmaso wrote: > It's a no for me. > > I'm not at all against JavaScript, and it's safe to enable it in > incognito mode (or when using a separate Firefox profile for Freenet). Oh, right, it is also very insecure. I'm not sure what "incognito mode" is, and believe it or not, not everyone uses Firefox or Chrome, but won't JavaScript still leak information like a drunk widow? (Ie. your browser, display resolution, and other potentially de-anonymizing stuff?) Sure, FProxy will try to filter scripts, but having (ugly) gaping holes lying around doesn't comfort me. (Although, even if (the various?) JavaScript implementations were made more anonymous-friendly, and even if they were made to work with less than 100% cpu, it's still just plain ugly / script-unfriendly / etc.) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Saturday 16 October 2010 10:58:30 Dennis Nezic wrote: > Oh, right, it is also very insecure. I'm not sure what "incognito mode" > is, and believe it or not, not everyone uses Firefox or Chrome, but > won't JavaScript still leak information like a drunk widow? (Ie. your > browser, display resolution, and other potentially de-anonymizing > stuff?) Sure, FProxy will try to filter scripts, but having (ugly) > gaping holes lying around doesn't comfort me. (Although, even if > (the various?) JavaScript implementations were made more > anonymous-friendly, and even if they were made to work with less than > 100% cpu, it's still just plain ugly / script-unfriendly / etc.) You obviously have not understood what we are actually talking about. We are NOT planning to allow freesites to execute arbitrary JavaScript. (And I had thought that would have been clear.) We are talking about the Freenet web interface being spiced up with JavaScript to increase usability. Freesites will keep being denied any JavaScript, as usual. David signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Friday 15 October 2010 16:54:22 Dennis Nezic wrote: > On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > > browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > > (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to > > FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. > > Wtf -- my computer clock has jumped a few months. It's April already? > > (JavaScript is pure evil -- it is at the root of much of website-evil > -- in ten years when it becomes extinct, people will look back at these > years, at how ugly and disfunctional and anti-user and mouse-centric > and cpu-draining we made life for ourselves, and shiver at the thought > of human potential. My main browser doesn't support JavaScript. I have > to be pulled by the teeth to open up Midori or Firefox on > asshole-websites, and pretty much every time my CPU skyrockets to 100% > and my fingers start bleeding on my touchpad, hovering over all the > retarded elusive god-damned popup menus.) IMHO "cpu draining" and "10 years" are kind of incompatible concepts! If you want to see what I think then read devl, I'm after an impartial poll... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Friday 15 October 2010 20:21:50 ringo wrote: > I'm fine with js being used, but it should deprecate gracefully. As a > previous poster noted, it's where 99% of browser exploits come through. So you turn it off on your primary internet-web browser? > > Ringo > > On 10/15/2010 12:07 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > >> We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > >> browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > >> (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to > >> FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. > > > > Frost/FMS/etc get around the latency/loading issue by background-working > > "subscriptions". Why not just implement something more along those > > lines -- expanding on the Bookmarks idea. That way the freesites people > > read are pretty instantly available, and updated. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Friday 15 October 2010 17:07:09 Dennis Nezic wrote: > On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > > browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > > (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to > > FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. > > Frost/FMS/etc get around the latency/loading issue by background-working > "subscriptions". Why not just implement something more along those > lines -- expanding on the Bookmarks idea. That way the freesites people > read are pretty instantly available, and updated. We support both subscribing to sites (bookmarks) and downloading them in the background. The main issue with regards to latency is inline images. The web-pushing branch deals with these without having to create a new browser profile etc, which has caused chaos (really bad things, permanently corrupting the user's browser config) when we've done it in the past. However that *does* degrade gracefully. What is at stake here is whether the rest of the user interface should *require* Javascript. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Saturday 16 October 2010 11:30:59 David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote: > On Saturday 16 October 2010 10:58:30 Dennis Nezic wrote: > > > Oh, right, it is also very insecure. I'm not sure what "incognito mode" > > is, and believe it or not, not everyone uses Firefox or Chrome, but > > won't JavaScript still leak information like a drunk widow? (Ie. your > > browser, display resolution, and other potentially de-anonymizing > > stuff?) Sure, FProxy will try to filter scripts, but having (ugly) > > gaping holes lying around doesn't comfort me. (Although, even if > > (the various?) JavaScript implementations were made more > > anonymous-friendly, and even if they were made to work with less than > > 100% cpu, it's still just plain ugly / script-unfriendly / etc.) > > You obviously have not understood what we are actually talking about. We are > NOT planning to allow freesites to execute arbitrary JavaScript. (And I had > thought that would have been clear.) > > We are talking about the Freenet web interface being spiced up with > JavaScript > to increase usability. Freesites will keep being denied any JavaScript, as > usual. We have to filter out not only javascript but also e.g. inline images already. This will not change. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:47:21 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Saturday 16 October 2010 11:30:59 David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote: > > On Saturday 16 October 2010 10:58:30 Dennis Nezic wrote: > > > > > Oh, right, it is also very insecure. I'm not sure what "incognito > > > mode" is, and believe it or not, not everyone uses Firefox or > > > Chrome, but won't JavaScript still leak information like a drunk > > > widow? (Ie. your browser, display resolution, and other > > > potentially de-anonymizing stuff?) Sure, FProxy will try to > > > filter scripts, but having (ugly) gaping holes lying around > > > doesn't comfort me. (Although, even if (the various?) JavaScript > > > implementations were made more anonymous-friendly, and even if > > > they were made to work with less than 100% cpu, it's still just > > > plain ugly / script-unfriendly / etc.) > > > > You obviously have not understood what we are actually talking > > about. We are NOT planning to allow freesites to execute arbitrary > > JavaScript. (And I had thought that would have been clear.) > > > > We are talking about the Freenet web interface being spiced up with > > JavaScript to increase usability. Freesites will keep being denied > > any JavaScript, as usual. > > We have to filter out not only javascript but also e.g. inline images > already. This will not change. I understand that -- it's just that I don't like the possible security hole to even exist. Just like innocent ol' CSS can leak history information, who knows what future (or present) exploits innocent ol' JavaScript might have. Web pages are not supposed to /do/ anything. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:43:00 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Friday 15 October 2010 16:54:22 Dennis Nezic wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > > > browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > > > (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll > > > to FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use > > > Frost. > > > > Wtf -- my computer clock has jumped a few months. It's April > > already? > > > > (JavaScript is pure evil -- it is at the root of much of > > website-evil > > -- in ten years when it becomes extinct, people will look back at > > these years, at how ugly and disfunctional and anti-user and > > mouse-centric and cpu-draining we made life for ourselves, and > > shiver at the thought of human potential. My main browser doesn't > > support JavaScript. I have to be pulled by the teeth to open up > > Midori or Firefox on asshole-websites, and pretty much every time > > my CPU skyrockets to 100% and my fingers start bleeding on my > > touchpad, hovering over all the retarded elusive god-damned popup > > menus.) > > IMHO "cpu draining" and "10 years" are kind of incompatible concepts! Lol, true :b. Nevertheless, I, for one, want Freenet to work on any computer, even old ones, not only on the latest quantum computers. The cpu-hogging (and other bugs) is due to crappy JavaScript implementations, I think. For example, the JavaScript on google-maps and youtube is frequently broken in my Midori browser, and I'm forced to use Firefox -- the only browser that website (un-)developers care about. Although, even in less buggy, more-efficient implementations, my cpu is still substantially bogged down with retarded animation and such. Adding (well, enforcing) another layer of complexity is just asking for trouble. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to > FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. You're asking this to a very biased population, by the way. Security/tech conscious people will always lean towards the 'no' side on this. The main (only) people who would say 'yes' or 'i don't care' are the kind of people who don't participate in mailing lists... the kind of people who just want to click once or twice, and have everything work perfectly. (Or throw it in the "Trash Bin" if it takes a few more clicks, or doesn't work perfectly.) Arguably, these people matter too. Although even then, it's for their own good -- even if they might not immediately realize it :b. (Not to use JavaScript.) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
> We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a browser > supporting Javascript. Why? > Yes or no answers would be useful No (way). > (feel free to make further comments). Javascript is the No 1 security hole in browsers - show me ONE exploit that does not at least require JS, let alone those originating from it. Why should I allow JS for completely anonymous posted freesites? Actually, if I where a malware developer, I would start salivating as soon as a "JS required" freenet goes online - great way to test my newest creations, complete with feedback via mailing list etc, and no risk of being caught. IMHO, all that freenet is intended for can be done in HTML 4, and therefore it should stick to that! ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:45:42 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Friday 15 October 2010 17:07:09 Dennis Nezic wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:29:52 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a > > > browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful > > > (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll > > > to FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use > > > Frost. > > > > Frost/FMS/etc get around the latency/loading issue by > > background-working "subscriptions". Why not just implement > > something more along those lines -- expanding on the Bookmarks > > idea. That way the freesites people read are pretty instantly > > available, and updated. > > We support both subscribing to sites (bookmarks) and downloading them > in the background. The main issue with regards to latency is inline > images. Do these subscriptions store the freesite in some temporary cache for instant retrieval? (Wouldn't that solve the latency, for subscribed freesites?) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 08:55 -0400, Dennis Nezic wrote: > > > > IMHO "cpu draining" and "10 years" are kind of incompatible concepts! > > Lol, true :b. Nevertheless, I, for one, want Freenet to work on any > computer, even old ones, not only on the latest quantum computers. > I think that cpu is not a parameter to take care when looking to support javascript. Freenet itself use huge amounts of cpu... What about of allow only some functions of javascript ? (I know that you can obfuscate everything but there is always a way to filter that shit). Why don't make a requirements list to see what javascript functionalities are useful and see what functions must be avoided for security's sake? Also is always good to have a test suite to check if the browser doesn't have holes... The last thing is that I remember that java applets can be used with security profiles. There is no option to disallow almost everything dangerous and see what can be allowed safely (and see if they are useful..). The main advantages is that you can have 'search engines' and some database tools embedded on freesites using compressing techniques and some cool visual effects :P (the most close to flash and even can use something like nasa world wind: http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/java/demos/index_applet_text_and_links.html). Regards, -- Felipe Barriga RichardsUser #238135 counter.li.org Licentiate on Computer Science UTFSM [http://www.utfsm.cl] Informatics Engineering StudentUTFSM [http://www.utfsm.cl] Santiago, ChilePhone: +56 9 78057086 http://blog.felipebarriga.cl MSN:m...@felipebarriga.cl ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 7:27 PM, wrote: > Why should I allow JS for completely anonymous posted freesites? > Nobody is advocating that, Freenet filters out Javascript and many other things that are downloaded from freesites. It would be really helpful if people could spend a little time to understand what is being debated before they start ranting. Ian. -- Ian Clarke CEO, SenseArray Email: i...@sensearray.com Ph: +1 512 422 3588 ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:11 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: > It would be really helpful if people could spend a little time to > understand what is being debated before they start ranting. Try again. I subscribed to this list lastMay? I have received perhaps a half dozen messages since then until this last week. Suddenly I have 50 messages some dating back to June and July. The first message I received in the bunch was the straw poll on javascript. Since then I have carefully read every message I have received. There has been very little discussion as to why js is needed, or I am missing a bunch of messages, or the discussion seriously needs to be brought down to a level that I can understand. So don't tell me to understand before I start ranting if you are not part of the solution of helping me understand. Until I understand, my vote still stands at no. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On 18.10.2010 23:29, Ray Jones wrote: On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:11 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: It would be really helpful if people could spend a little time to understand what is being debated before they start ranting. Try again. I subscribed to this list lastMay? I have received perhaps a half dozen messages since then until this last week. Suddenly I have 50 messages some dating back to June and July. The first message I received in the bunch was the straw poll on javascript. Since then I have carefully read every message I have received. There has been very little discussion as to why js is needed, or I am missing a bunch of messages, or the discussion seriously needs to be brought down to a level that I can understand. So don't tell me to understand before I start ranting if you are not part of the solution of helping me understand. Until I understand, my vote still stands at no. You misunderstood the poll question. Nobody is suggesting that freesites should be allowed to have JS in them, but rather Freenet's own web proxy would have JS in the interface. That JS would only be written by those same developers who today write Java code for Freenet already. - Volodya -- http://freedom.libsyn.com/ Echo of Freedom, Radical Podcast "None of us are free until all of us are free."~ Mihail Bakunin ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Ray Jones wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:11 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > It would be really helpful if people could spend a little time to > > understand what is being debated before they start ranting. > > Try again. I subscribed to this list lastMay? I have received > perhaps a half dozen messages since then until this last week. Suddenly > I have 50 messages some dating back to June and July. The first message > I received in the bunch was the straw poll on javascript. Since then I > have carefully read every message I have received. There has been very > little discussion as to why js is needed, or I am missing a bunch of > messages, or the discussion seriously needs to be brought down to a > level that I can understand. So don't tell me to understand before I > start ranting if you are not part of the solution of helping me > understand. Until I understand, my vote still stands at no. And this is the problem. If you admit that you don't understand the issues then why express any opinion at all until you do? Here it is: - Our UI sucks - Our UI framework sucks - We need a new UI framework that will make it easy for us to create a decent looking UI - Of the options available, GWT seems like the best one because: - it has great free dev tools - its pure Java - it makes it easy for non-designers to create decent looking UIs because all the widgets are pre-designed - We are already using parts of GWT in the codebase. Rather than everyone just poking holes in every suggestion, why not suggest alternatives? Oh, and if it involves creating a powerful UI which falls-back gracefully if there is no Javascript, please consider how much additional work would be required to do this, and how exactly it is to be achieved. Ian. -- Ian Clarke CEO, SenseArray Email: i...@sensearray.com Ph: +1 512 422 3588 ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On 10/18/2010 02:29 PM, Ray Jones wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:11 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: > >> It would be really helpful if people could spend a little time to >> understand what is being debated before they start ranting. > > Try again. I subscribed to this list lastMay? I have received > perhaps a half dozen messages since then until this last week. Suddenly > I have 50 messages some dating back to June and July. The first message > I received in the bunch was the straw poll on javascript. Since then I > have carefully read every message I have received. There has been very > little discussion as to why js is needed, or I am missing a bunch of > messages, or the discussion seriously needs to be brought down to a > level that I can understand. So don't tell me to understand before I > start ranting if you are not part of the solution of helping me > understand. Until I understand, my vote still stands at no. When first joining a mailing list, it's generally good etiquette to peruse the list archives prior to posting; not only to get a feel for the community, but also to ensure your question or statement hasn't been brought up in the past. http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/ As for the Javascript requirement... I suggest switching 'require' for 'intelligently utilize'. I can see how the use of Javascript and AJAX-type functionality can make the FProxy experience much better; however, there is a lot to be said for gracefully degrading to support user agents that are unwilling or unable to execute javascript, such as Lynx, or possibly Curl. Likewise, since this is still highly experimental software, there is at least a slight probability of a bug or a maliciously crafted insert slipping a bit of Javascript through the content filter, so having the option to disable it completely (at the expense of a slower or less-featureful FProxy experience) might be beneficial for those truly paranoid. -- Fuzzy love, -CyberLeo Technical Administrator CyberLeo.Net Webhosting http://www.CyberLeo.Net Furry Peace! - http://.fur.com/peace/ ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:57 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: > > And this is the problem. If you admit that you don't understand the > issues then why express any opinion at all until you do? > Because as I began learning about internet safety and security, js has been at the top of the list as the devil in disguise. My vote was, "No, but plead your case as to why it's needed and ask again." > Here it is: > > > - Our UI sucks > - Our UI framework sucks > - We need a new UI framework that will make it easy for us to create a > decent looking UI > - Of the options available, GWT seems like the best one because: > - it has great free dev tools > - its pure Java > - it makes it easy for non-designers to create decent looking UIs > because all the widgets are pre-designed > - We are already using parts of GWT in the codebase. > What?!? You want to add js so that we can have a cutesy interface?!? Tell me how js is going to improve the functionality. Tell me how it's going to fix the "backed off" problem. Tell me how it will keep 1/4 of my files from having to be re-downloaded because of an internal error. Tell me how it's going to help me get more than a 100kB/s throughput. You want to improve the INTERFACE? No. Ray ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Ray Jones wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:57 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: > > And this is the problem. If you admit that you don't understand the > > issues then why express any opinion at all until you do? > > Because as I began learning about internet safety and security, js has > been at the top of the list as the devil in disguise. My vote was, "No, > but plead your case as to why it's needed and ask again." > And my vote is to ignore the votes of people who can't be bothered to inform themselves before expressing an opinion on a subject. What?!? You want to add js so that we can have a cutesy interface?!? > No, a usable interface. > Tell me how js is going to improve the functionality. It will improve functionality by making Freenet easier for newbies to use it. > Tell me how it's > going to fix the "backed off" problem. It won't, that's not its purpose. > Tell me how it will keep 1/4 of > my files from having to be re-downloaded because of an internal error. > It won't, that's not its purpose. > Tell me how it's going to help me get more than a 100kB/s throughput. > It won't, that's not its purpose. > You want to improve the INTERFACE? > Correct. Ian. -- Ian Clarke CEO, SenseArray Email: i...@sensearray.com Ph: +1 512 422 3588 ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
First time lurker post. Freenet already requires Java. This will only extend its function to the UI. No changes will occur with regards to freesites, addons or seperate programs that use freenet. Also people as versed in security as the freenet team are don't see a security issue themselves. If what I have stated above is correct then I guess I'm the only person voting yes so far. In regards to those people who chose to run frenet on minimalist machines the cost of bettering technology is often having to upgrade your hardware. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 22:05 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: > And my vote is to ignore the votes of people who can't be bothered to > inform themselves before expressing an opinion on a subject. > What do you mean, "Can't be bothered"? I've been subscribed to this group for ~5 months with the purpose of informing myself. Considering that just before last weekend this list, that has previously been virtually dead, began spitting messages at me dated back in June and July, I find it a bit scary that the people who are supposed to be maintaining a working mailing list, and seem to be only partially successful, may be the same people who are going to update the anonymity software with js that is, in my understanding, a potential identity sieve just waiting for the slightest "oops". But you do make a good point in terms of the learning curve. Even as a quasi-technically-minded newbie, the Freenet interface took a lot of time and work for me to understand. One of your previous messages in this thread contained the following: > - We need a new UI framework that will make it easy for us to create a decent looking UI > - Of the options available, GWT seems like the best one because: > - it has great free dev tools > - its pure Java > - it makes it easy for non-designers to create decent looking UIs because all the widgets are pre-designed > - We are already using parts of GWT in the codebase. These seem to me to be eye-candy answers. I understand that js can make "looking pretty" a lot easier. But other than beauty, how could the use of js ease the difficulties for newbies, and why would it be better than non-js solutions? Ray ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 23:55:18 +0400, Volodya wrote: > On 18.10.2010 23:29, Ray Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 14:11 -0500, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > >> It would be really helpful if people could spend a little time to > >> understand what is being debated before they start ranting. > > > > Try again. I subscribed to this list lastMay? I have received > > perhaps a half dozen messages since then until this last week. > > Suddenly I have 50 messages some dating back to June and July. The > > first message I received in the bunch was the straw poll on > > javascript. Since then I have carefully read every message I have > > received. There has been very little discussion as to why js is > > needed, or I am missing a bunch of messages, or the discussion > > seriously needs to be brought down to a level that I can > > understand. So don't tell me to understand before I start ranting > > if you are not part of the solution of helping me understand. Until > > I understand, my vote still stands at no. > > You misunderstood the poll question. Nobody is suggesting that > freesites should be allowed to have JS in them, but rather Freenet's > own web proxy would have JS in the interface. That JS would only be > written by those same developers who today write Java code for > Freenet already. We know, but it's still asking for "oops"es as mentioned earlier. Who knows how each JavaScript implementation handles it's caches and temporary stuff. Who knows how other malicious sites will be able to manage to access this stuff. (Nobody now, probably, but I think it's perfectly possible that it will happen.) Also, "pretty" is very subjective. I, for one, find JavaScript stuff generally repulsive. (Animations and anything "dynamic".) And that's assuming the stuff works in the first place--many times it doesn't--probably due to a broken or sloppy implementation. Freenet's "UI" is mainly supposed to be the actual Freesites. The purpose of all this potential scripting is simply to make newbies aware that pictures (and less popular freesites) take a while to load. Is a complete new framework really necessary to simply let newbies know things are still being fetched in the background? Is a simple html self-refreshing page, with a list of freesite-fetches in progress not good enough? If more ambitious UI features are planned, I would still avoid using JavaScript. I would use GTK or something actually designed for applications. Not a flaky scripting-hack of webpages which were never designed to behave like apps in the first place. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:10:55 -0400, Dennis Nezic wrote: > On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 23:55:18 +0400, Volodya wrote: > > You misunderstood the poll question. Nobody is suggesting that > > freesites should be allowed to have JS in them, but rather Freenet's > > own web proxy would have JS in the interface. That JS would only be > > written by those same developers who today write Java code for Freenet > > already. > > We know, but it's still asking for "oops"es as mentioned earlier. Who > knows how each JavaScript implementation handles it's caches and > temporary stuff. Who knows how other malicious sites will be able to > manage to access this stuff. (Nobody now, probably, but I think it's > perfectly possible that it will happen.) I second this. > Also, "pretty" is very subjective. ... > And that's assuming the stuff works in the first place--many times it > doesn't--probably due to a broken or sloppy implementation. Freenet's > "UI" is mainly supposed to be the actual Freesites. The purpose of all > this potential scripting is simply to make newbies aware that pictures > (and less popular freesites) take a while to load. Is a complete new > framework really necessary to simply let newbies know things are still > being fetched in the background? Is a simple html self-refreshing page, > with a list of freesite-fetches in progress not good enough? > > If more ambitious UI features are planned, I would still avoid using > JavaScript. ... Not a flaky scripting-hack of webpages which were never > designed to behave like apps in the first place. And this, too. Personally, I never had a problem using freenets interface. IMHO, making it "more user friendly" targets the wrong audience - all those IT-handicapped dumba who barely can switch their PC on/off. They wouldn't understand .. - what freenet is in general (shows in some posts on this list every couple of weeks..) - why Js is allowed and deemed "perfectly *cough* save" for freenet, when you can read everywhere that JS is so dangerous (IF they do read such things at all ... ) - why the freepages still look so butt-ugly, when they could use nifty JS navigation bars (told you they won't see the difference; => see that recent post which didn't differentiate between Java and JS ...) .. etc... You know what? Why don't you do a freenet-browser in Java ?!? Than there's anything you want - nice GUI, and complete control 'bout what freesites can use/do. Oh, and DAUs (dumb a** users) don't have to point their browsers at 127.0.0.1:, what is way to difficult for them to understand anyway. yours A. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
You know what? Why don't you do a freenet-browser in Java ?!? Than there's anything you want - nice GUI, and complete control 'bout what freesites can use/do. Oh, and DAUs (dumb a** users) don't have to point their browsers at 127.0.0.1:, what is way to difficult for them to understand anyway. yours A. There already is a Java based Freenet only browser. Unfortunately its development has been abandoned, and it's not very useable by now, it's shipped together with frost at the moment. - Volodya -- http://freedom.libsyn.com/ Echo of Freedom, Radical Podcast "None of us are free until all of us are free."~ Mihail Bakunin ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Straw poll: Should Freenet require Javascript?
-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext In <201010151629.56896.t...@amphibian.dyndns.org> Matthew Toseland wrote: >We are considering making it impossible to use Freenet without a browser supporting Javascript. Yes or no answers would be useful (feel free to make further comments). I will post a similar poll to FMS. I suggest somebody does Frost, I personally don't use Frost. > I say not only "NO!", but "HELL NO!". It's bad enough there are sites I use on the regular internet that require it in order to function. One of the things I've always liked about Freenet is the decided lack of javascript! -END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
