The most convicting truth about my error in considering freenet a
plutocratic network was given to me by private mail, as follow:
[...]
> The key here is _distribution_ over
> the wide geographic area, which is simple for "regular" users, but
> requires a very costly and difficult to manage conc
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
On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 12:32:55PM +0200, daniele wrote:
> That would be true if there where only one or few auto-requester robots
> (ARR). But if governments, politicians, corporations etc... will
> discover a new audience in freenet, they will not think two times about
> setting up ARRs.
>
>
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 06:38:15PM -0400, Juiceman wrote:
>
> Yes and (mostly) no. Having many nodes/servers/clusters and pushing
> and pulling the data you want will have a small effect on the network,
> but generally speaking the more popular the requested data is, the
> more places it resides.
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 06:08:28PM -0400, S M wrote:
> That's why it would be a good idea to be able to insert content into your
> local node and have it be kept there.
>
> You can do that with a little bit of effort but having this ability built in
> would be a good idea. Thus if the keys are r
Juiceman ha scritto:
Yes and (mostly) no. Having many nodes/servers/clusters and pushing
and pulling the data you want will have a small effect on the network,
but generally speaking the more popular the requested data is, the
more places it resides. Thus if you have 10 nodes/servers/clusters
p
