That's the idea. Like I said, we'll probably have opennet eventually.Then we agree ;)I don't think that freenet can do an opennet until the darkenet works properly. My concern is that the darknet will never work properly, however.They can, although they are already blown. Anyway the point is that i
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew
Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 05:50:34PM +0100, Roger Hayter wrote:
FWIW, I agree with all your points. And I would add that no-one is more
than 2 steps away from a police spy - I find random connection *adds*
plausible denia
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 04:06:50PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > "in its current state"
>
> Sure- I can only look at the present. I'm usre that hte project has plans
> for fixing things, but I'm just trying to express the way I see it.
>
> > What exactly were his reasons?
>
> I talked t
> "in its current state"
Sure- I can only look at the present. I'm usre that hte project has plans
for fixing things, but I'm just trying to express the way I see it.
> What exactly were his reasons?
I talked to two physical friends of mine- I tried to outline their answers
below- One said that
On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 06:15:04PM -0400, Colin Davis wrote:
> >
> >If/when we do opennet people will use that instead till it gets
> >blocked(it will happen eventually), then we're back to trying to get
> >the darknet working for everyone again. If most people will use the
> >opennet till it's imp
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 05:50:34PM +0100, Roger Hayter wrote:
>
> FWIW, I agree with all your points. And I would add that no-one is more
> than 2 steps away from a police spy - I find random connection *adds*
> plausible deniability: although not (and this is a valid point that has
> been mad
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 10:22:31AM -0400, Colin Davis wrote:
> I'd like to use this opportunity to disagree with the current .7
> strategy of the darknet- I've done it before, but this is the Chat
> list, so It's not Off-topic to have a discussion about it.
>
> I'd like to start of by admittin
On 6/26/06, Colin Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If/when we do opennet people will use that instead till it gets
> blocked(it will happen eventually), then we're back to trying to get
> the darknet working for everyone again. If most people will use the
> opennet till it's impossible to do
FWIW, I agree with all your points. And I would add that no-one is
more than 2 steps away from a police spy - I find random connection
*adds* plausible deniability: although not (and this is a valid
point that has been made by the developers) if running Freenet is
itself a crime. But if
If/when we do opennet people will use that instead till it gets
blocked(it will happen eventually), then we're back to trying to get
the darknet working for everyone again. If most people will use the
opennet till it's impossible to do anymore there will be very few and
probably small seperate da
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Colin Davis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
I'd like to use this opportunity to disagree with the current .7
strategy of the darknet- I've done it before, but this is the Chat
list, so It's not Off-topic to have a discussion about it.
I'd like to start of by admitti
I'd like to use this opportunity to disagree with the current .7
strategy of the darknet- I've done it before, but this is the Chat
list, so It's not Off-topic to have a discussion about it.
I'd like to start of by admitting that I probably know the least
about the subject, compared with a
12 matches
Mail list logo
