Yeh - I know you've heard them all, but here's a few more...
n: Real Programmers don't write documentation. The code *is* the
documentation.
n+1: Real Programmers use short identifier names. If it was hard to write,
it should be hard to understand.
n+2: Real Programmers only write in Java becau
Unable to resist responding. :)
> n: Real Programmers don't write documentation. The code *is* the
> documentation.
After much experience trying to read both my own and other peoples code
while drunk, tired, or when not being paid by the hour I love
documentation. My #1 'bad documentation' compl
> > Every computer should be running a Freenet node anyway. There are ways
> > to make Freenet work behind firewalls, though it's a bit tricky last I
> > heard. Something like a Squid proxy server for Freenet is actualy
> > redundant.
>
> I mean that from a security standpoint I would not want ev
<>
> > Every computer should be running a Freenet node anyway. There are
> > ways to make Freenet work behind firewalls, though it's a bit
> > tricky last I heard. Something like a Squid proxy server for
> > Freenet is actualy redundant.
>
> That's ridiculous. Run _one_ node per LAN.
Sorry Mark
> begin Michael quotation of Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 08:39:47PM -0500:
>
> > Usually I've always tried to concentrate disk space at the servers. These
> > days with 20gigger drives in even the most basic client machines it'd be
> > great to use the extra diskspace but I'd still rather serve up that
Timm Murray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Sorry Mark, but the "one computer, one node" rule is something I
> picked up from Oskar (I think), and I decided I agreed with him (and
> not just because he's Oskar). Freenet works better with lots of
> smaller nodes to spread the data out then to have
>>From David McNab:
>>A Hypothetical Question:
>>If the system of software patents, plus the DMCA and SSSCA, had been
written into law
>>in 1950, what would have happened in the computer industry since then?
>>Think about it.
From: "Scott Haman"
> I am working on a research
> paper covering the
Greg Wooledge:
> Timm Murray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Sorry Mark, but the "one computer, one node" rule is something I
> > picked up from Oskar (I think), and I decided I agreed with him
> > (and not just because he's Oskar).
Does Freenet routing _really_ seem all that attractive to you for
I think it is a bit silly to build in any restrictions that aren't needed
to reach your goals. If people want to put FreeNet on ever machine they
own great, if they want to put it on one machine per LAN great, if they
want to run 5000 nodes on a mainframe then great. The same with allowing
people
Michael:
> I think it is a bit silly to build in any restrictions that aren't needed
> to reach your goals. If people want to put FreeNet on ever machine they
> own great, if they want to put it on one machine per LAN great, if they
> want to run 5000 nodes on a mainframe then great. The same with
Said Mark J Roberts on Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 11:21:21PM -0500,
> And the "transparent store" thing is _clearly_ useless.
Not useless.
Dangerous.
--
fingerprint: 740F B8D9 DF20 362C F5BC CDE6 6923 5A48 7657 541F
lynx -source http://www.ece.utexas.edu/~jhs/public_key.gpg | gpg --import
___
11 matches
Mail list logo
