On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 10:27:31AM -0400, Paul Derbyshire wrote: > Anyway the freenet-related stuff at the bottom looks interesting. I > think the reputation stuff may be quite generalizable for a lot of > other stuff. There's occasionally talk of how to influence unwanted > stuff into expiring from the freenet here -- reputation management > that blacklists keys (and bad blacklisters) in principle lets one > stop their machine ever retrieving keys that > are on a blacklist for something they don't want to make spread > through > freenet, e.g. child pornography. A popular blacklist could indeed > depress the spread of a blacklisted file, perhaps to the point it > can't be found in any data store but that of the one loser who keeps > reinserting the thing.
The fundamental problem with blacklists/whitelists is that if nodes only pass on keys supported by a given whitelist, or by any of a given set of whitelists, etc, then node operators will become legally liable for their choice of whitelist. If their whitelist includes any "interesting" content e.g. the diebold or Co$ files, then they will be prosecuted. -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
