On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 10:28:49PM -0400, John Meeks wrote:
> It seems to me that finding people to communicate with (trust) is the hard
> part, and actually communicating with them is the easy part. The opennet
> allows you to not have to trust people, since everything is anonymous, and
> thus so
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 08:55:01PM +, Bob wrote:
> Matthew Toseland writes:
>
> --snip--
> > No, there will be an opennet. It will probably operate on similar
> > principles to the current 0.5 network, but will be 0.7.
> > >
> > > We could have a rotating public nodes system like we currentl
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 10:28:49PM -0400, John Meeks wrote:
> It seems to me that finding people to communicate with (trust) is the hard
> part, and actually communicating with them is the easy part. The opennet
> allows you to not have to trust people, since everything is anonymous, and
> thus so
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 08:55:01PM +, Bob wrote:
> Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> --snip--
> > No, there will be an opennet. It will probably operate on similar
> > principles to the current 0.5 network, but will be 0.7.
> > >
> > > We could have a rotating public nodes syst
It seems to me that finding people to communicate with (trust) is the hard
part, and actually communicating with them is the easy part. The opennet
allows you to not have to trust people, since everything is anonymous, and
thus solves the hard problem (in addition to the easy one). The friends
ne
Matthew Toseland writes:
--snip--
> No, there will be an opennet. It will probably operate on similar
> principles to the current 0.5 network, but will be 0.7.
> >
> > We could have a rotating public nodes system like we currently do with
> > seednodes.ref, but surely this would horribly break t
It seems to me that finding people to communicate with (trust) is the hard
part, and actually communicating with them is the easy part. The opennet
allows you to not have to trust people, since everything is anonymous, and
thus solves the hard problem (in addition to the easy one). The friends
ne
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 03:53:27PM +, Bob wrote:
> John Meeks writes:
>
> > The new information about version 0.7 sounds pretty good, but one thing
> > about it concerns me. Assuming I don't know anyone who is using freenet,
> > how do I get onto the network? (Remember, I'm asking this abou
John Meeks writes:
> The new information about version 0.7 sounds pretty good, but one thing
> about it concerns me. Assuming I don't know anyone who is using freenet,
> how do I get onto the network? (Remember, I'm asking this about the next
> version, since it says you can only connect if a "
Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
--snip--
> No, there will be an opennet. It will probably operate on similar
> principles to the current 0.5 network, but will be 0.7.
> >
> > We could have a rotating public nodes system like we currently do with
> > seednodes.ref, but surely this wou
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 03:53:27PM +, Bob wrote:
> John Meeks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The new information about version 0.7 sounds pretty good, but one thing
> > about it concerns me. Assuming I don't know anyone who is using freenet,
> > how do I get onto the network? (Remember, I
John Meeks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The new information about version 0.7 sounds pretty good, but one thing
> about it concerns me. Assuming I don't know anyone who is using freenet,
> how do I get onto the network? (Remember, I'm asking this about the next
> version, since it says you can
12 matches
Mail list logo
