Fair enough. Is anyone actually working on it any more? Also, have they gotten rid of the home grown (and therefore insecure almost by definition, unless the home happens to be the NSA) crypto algorithms?
On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 05:47:09AM -0800, Michael wrote: > I jumped the Freenet ship over a month ago and swam to the easy safety > of Entropy. Maybe not all the content but hey, it works and works and > doesn't need updates of anything(java or otherwise), it is consistent, > fast, and I don't have to maintain, re-maintain, shutdown, restart, > reconfigure, renothing to keep it going, plus, no bickering on the chats > over what is the problem du jour with the networks or nodes. > Danke. > I may return to check out Freenet some day. Marginally possible. > > On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 00:55, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Send Support mailing list submissions to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Support digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) > > 2. and another thing (Newsbyte) > > 3. RE: a dead horse and other animals (Nicholas Sturm) > > 4. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Toad) > > 5. Re: and another thing (Toad) > > 6. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Wayne McDougall) > > 7. Re: a dead horse and other animals (Newsbyte) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:22:04 +0100 > > From: "Newsbyte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [freenet-support] a dead horse and other animals > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > "I've been getting TFE fine, but I haven't been able to load FIND for almost > > a > > week. The lists are pretty silent lately, as well. Conspiracy theory, > > anyone?" > > > > No, the explanation is simply this, that many active (meaning formerly > > inserting/posting) Freenetters have gone over to i2p. Not only do you see > > icons such as thetower guy there, but a lot of other ex-freenetters, some of > > which still didn't leave Freenet completely (like me). > > > > I've been pointing that out in the irc chan too, but I got slapped on the > > wrist for it. aparently, saying the obvious is 'not done'. For the first > > time, Freenet has some serious competition, and it's not performing well, > > speaking in a darwinian sense. As yet, it doesn't seem to affect finances > > that much, but once you start to lose interest and people go to another > > (promising) I2P, that can't be far away. > > > > I have said many times before that there is a lack of progress, or at least > > a sense of progress, certainly for the ordinary freenet user (and, in fact, > > for the end-user there HAS been little progress). The development cycle of > > Freenet is NOT normal, not even for a new-technology-beta. It seems that > > Freenet is performing better...but compared to what? To how it was a year > > ago? No doubt, back then it was totally bork. It's a pitty we don't have > > performance testing logs, but I suspect that it's now about as good as it > > was 2 years ago...hmmm. Yesyes, I know a lot of technological goodies have > > been added, but that doesn't interest Joe Doe: he just wants it to work, and > > good. That means, primarely; finding something he wants, and d/l it fast, > > and, seen the fact it's freenet, in a safe manner. > > > > Freenet doesn't do all that. > > > > Now, granted, though I have been pleasantly surprised, neither does I2P, as > > yet. But the difference is, they are working 4 months on it, and have come a > > long way and they *are* improving dramatically. With that pace they are > > gaining support rapidly, as already can be seen (and that's why it has > > suddenly become more quiet on the posts, and Freesites are less and less > > being updated). The moment the DHT is ready, Freenet will not offer anything > > en plus, practically speaking. > > > > Now, I'm ambigous about this all. In theory, competition is a good > > thing...only it doesn't seem to have any impact, here. It's mostly being > > ignored, and when someone points it out, it's not welcomed. Furthermore, I > > don't think two main anonymity projects can be maintained by the OSS crowd, > > at least not the way it is done now. what is taken by one is at the loss of > > the other one, and vice versa, me thinks. > > > > That's why, in a former post, I tried to stimulate both parties to try to > > merge their technology and forces...but to no apparent avail. Is it that > > difficult to see that both projects have specific advantages, that would or > > at least could benefit both? Geez. Freenet has potential, it still has, but > > it just lays there as a dead horse, and i2p is has great ease-to-use > > promise, but still has to prove some basic things, like being able to scale > > (not that Freenet is out of the loop with that one neither). > > > > Anyways, when I pointed this out, I got the remark I was bulshitting, > > because I didn't even run a node anymore. Which was true, because I told so: > > last stable node I ran was one or two months ago. (On a positive sidenote, > > Ian claimed he didn't think I *really* was a troll ;-). Well, always being > > reasonable, I thought there was a point to it; it was time to see how this > > latest node was - again- going to be fanfuckingtastic. So I went for it. > > > > Fantastic as freenet may be nowadays, I hardly started or I got an error. > > First of all, I had to get rid of my unstable node. So I did. then I tried > > the download on the d/lpage of freenet: to no avail. It couldn't find the > > JVM. There WAS a JVM on it, rest assured though. It worked perfectly with > > anything else, including the former unstable node, even. But the installer > > said there wsn't any JVM on my box, period. > > > > Now, Ian always claims I don't say anything worthwhile, so I want it to be > > noted that I say now, very clearly, that the installer is bugged. There is > > definitaly something wrong with it. Now, no doubt that bug will linger there > > for another 4 months at least - if not forever, but I *did* tell you now > > about it, so don't be telling me I said nothing about it! > > > > I spent a copple of hours the last two days to try to get it working, as in > > just getting the damn thing installed...but it just doesn't. I've tried the > > webinstall just letting it run, downloading it on the HD and trying to run > > it, changing my regedit of my JVM (as Kev told me), restarting it, > > uninstalling my JVM, reinstalling it, trying some other stuff, > > re-uninstalling it, trying to download the java+freenetinstall, got it back > > corrupted, etc. > > > > Thereis NO WAY a noob wanting to try Freenet would go through even half of > > all this. > > > > In any case, I feel I have tried my best to run a node, and I don't accept > > the premise anymore that I should shut up because I don't run a freenode any > > longer. I think some devs seem to forget that, despite all the yummies of > > using linux and the lot, 90% is still using windows. If your windows > > installer is a mess, then that is a major issue, not some far away > > we'll-look-at-it-if-we-got-the-time thingy. > > > > No doubt not everyone got this installerdifficulties, or otherwise someone > > would have looked at it already, but I do remember that I, as well as > > others, have reported difficulties with the wininstaller before. I think a > > major overhaul and really testing all aspects of the wininstaller out would > > be a worthwhile thing. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:23:45 +0100 > > From: "Newsbyte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [freenet-support] and another thing > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > As I said on IRC, a collegue of mine has made an article (well, actually > > more of a reference/pointer/short description) to freenet, and refered to > > the sourceforge page. > > > > Maybe that seems like an obvious mistake, but in any case: why doesn't > > anyone who can, update the f- page, there? It's still says 0.5.2.1 with as > > date 17 july 2003(!!). Great impression that makes for people that arrive > > there. > > > > Call it worthless what I say, but being mentioned on major putermagazines is > > not that easily to brush off. These kind of things will happen again, and > > it's a total waste if we don't correct it, which can be done quite easily, > > by updating it more regulary. > > > > I remember, btw, that I've said this before, even long before this article > > came out. But I guess it wasn't worth any attention. After all, as I've come > > to understand, I never said anything worthwhile. > > > > And yes, I'm whining. I feel entitled too. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:07:59 -0500 > > From: "Nicholas Sturm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: [freenet-support] a dead horse and other animals > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > > > Don't bury your problem on page 3 of your letter. Research has > > shown that a plea for donations should be three pages long, > > but that does not mean that most read more than the first > > paragraph and the last. > > > > > > > [Original Message] > > > From: Newsbyte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: 11/25/2004 10:16:38 AM > > > Subject: [freenet-support] a dead horse and other animals > > > > > > Now, Ian always claims I don't say anything worthwhile, so I want it to be > > > noted that I say now, very clearly, that the installer is bugged. There is > > > definitely something wrong with it. Now, no doubt that bug will linger > > there > > > for another 4 months at least - if not forever, but I *did* tell you now > > > about it, so don't be telling me I said nothing about it! > > > > > > I spent a couple of hours the last two days to try to get it working, as > > in > > > just getting the damn thing installed...but it just doesn't. I've tried > > the > > > web installer just letting it run, downloading it on the HD and trying to > > run > > > it, changing my reedit [?] of my JVM (as Kev told me), restarting it, > > > uninstalling my JVM, reinstalling it, trying some other stuff, > > > re-uninstalling it, trying to download the java+freenetinstall, got it > > back > > > corrupted, etc. > > > > > > Thereis NO WAY a noob wanting to try Freenet would go through even half of > > > all this. > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 4 > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:55:39 +0000 > > From: Toad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [freenet-support] a dead horse and other animals > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 02:22:04PM +0100, Newsbyte wrote: > > > "I've been getting TFE fine, but I haven't been able to load FIND for > > > almost > > > a > > > week. The lists are pretty silent lately, as well. Conspiracy theory, > > > anyone?" > > > > > > No, the explanation is simply this, that many active (meaning formerly > > > inserting/posting) Freenetters have gone over to i2p. Not only do you see > > > icons such as thetower guy there, but a lot of other ex-freenetters, some > > > of > > > which still didn't leave Freenet completely (like me). > > > > > > I've been pointing that out in the irc chan too, but I got slapped on the > > > wrist for it. aparently, saying the obvious is 'not done'. For the first > > > time, Freenet has some serious competition, and it's not performing well, > > > speaking in a darwinian sense. As yet, it doesn't seem to affect finances > > > that much, but once you start to lose interest and people go to another > > > (promising) I2P, that can't be far away. > > > > It doesn't need to attract finances. Jrandom can work on it for free, > > being retired (at the age of 30 or something). > > > > > > > > I have said many times before that there is a lack of progress, or at > > > least > > > a sense of progress, certainly for the ordinary freenet user (and, in > > > fact, > > > for the end-user there HAS been little progress). The development cycle of > > > Freenet is NOT normal, not even for a new-technology-beta. It seems that > > > Freenet is performing better...but compared to what? To how it was a year > > > > So what's the magic cure this time? If we put out 0.6, that will make > > Freenet suddenly work much better? I argue the opposite: if we put out > > 0.6, we will be slashdotted, and the network will collapse. > > > > > ago? No doubt, back then it was totally bork. It's a pitty we don't have > > > performance testing logs, but I suspect that it's now about as good as it > > > was 2 years ago...hmmm. Yesyes, I know a lot of technological goodies have > > > been added, but that doesn't interest Joe Doe: he just wants it to work, > > > and > > > good. That means, primarely; finding something he wants, and d/l it fast, > > > and, seen the fact it's freenet, in a safe manner. > > > > > > Freenet doesn't do all that. > > > > > > Now, granted, though I have been pleasantly surprised, neither does I2P, > > > as > > > yet. But the difference is, they are working 4 months on it, and have > > > come a > > > long way and they *are* improving dramatically. With that pace they are > > > gaining support rapidly, as already can be seen (and that's why it has > > > suddenly become more quiet on the posts, and Freesites are less and less > > > being updated). The moment the DHT is ready, Freenet will not offer > > > anything > > > en plus, practically speaking. > > > > That is simply wrong. Freesites come and go, we have a significant churn > > of authors, but many freesites are new and many are updated. And I2P is > > so small as to not have a remotely credible anonymity set. > > > > > > > > Now, I'm ambigous about this all. In theory, competition is a good > > > thing...only it doesn't seem to have any impact, here. It's mostly being > > > ignored, and when someone points it out, it's not welcomed. Furthermore, I > > > don't think two main anonymity projects can be maintained by the OSS > > > crowd, > > > at least not the way it is done now. what is taken by one is at the loss > > > of > > > the other one, and vice versa, me thinks. > > > > > > That's why, in a former post, I tried to stimulate both parties to try to > > > merge their technology and forces...but to no apparent avail. Is it that > > > > I have talked with jrandom on numerous occasions. He has helped me in > > such matters as designing premix routing. And furthermore, we have > > talked about using I2P for premix routing; he tells me I2P is not ready > > for the sort of scale of deployment that would be involved, and I > > believe him. > > > > > difficult to see that both projects have specific advantages, that would > > > or > > > at least could benefit both? Geez. Freenet has potential, it still has, > > > but > > > it just lays there as a dead horse, and i2p is has great ease-to-use > > > promise, but still has to prove some basic things, like being able to > > > scale > > > (not that Freenet is out of the loop with that one neither). > > > > > > Anyways, when I pointed this out, I got the remark I was bulshitting, > > > because I didn't even run a node anymore. Which was true, because I told > > > so: > > > last stable node I ran was one or two months ago. (On a positive sidenote, > > > Ian claimed he didn't think I *really* was a troll ;-). Well, always being > > > reasonable, I thought there was a point to it; it was time to see how this > > > latest node was - again- going to be fanfuckingtastic. So I went for it. > > > > > > Fantastic as freenet may be nowadays, I hardly started or I got an error. > > > First of all, I had to get rid of my unstable node. So I did. then I tried > > > the download on the d/lpage of freenet: to no avail. It couldn't find the > > > JVM. There WAS a JVM on it, rest assured though. It worked perfectly with > > > anything else, including the former unstable node, even. But the installer > > > said there wsn't any JVM on my box, period. > > > > Gee whiz, there's a bug in the wininstaller. News at 11. There are no > > bugs in I2P!!! > > > > > > Now, Ian always claims I don't say anything worthwhile, so I want it to be > > > noted that I say now, very clearly, that the installer is bugged. There is > > > definitaly something wrong with it. Now, no doubt that bug will linger > > > there > > > for another 4 months at least - if not forever, but I *did* tell you now > > > about it, so don't be telling me I said nothing about it! > > > > Not necessarily, we have a patch. We just need somebody to recompile it > > for us. > > > > > > I spent a copple of hours the last two days to try to get it working, as > > > in > > > just getting the damn thing installed...but it just doesn't. I've tried > > > the > > > webinstall just letting it run, downloading it on the HD and trying to run > > > it, changing my regedit of my JVM (as Kev told me), restarting it, > > > uninstalling my JVM, reinstalling it, trying some other stuff, > > > re-uninstalling it, trying to download the java+freenetinstall, got it > > > back > > > corrupted, etc. > > > > Did you try installing the 1.4 JVM? > > > > > > Thereis NO WAY a noob wanting to try Freenet would go through even half of > > > all this. > > > > So you're saying I should run Windows for the good of the project now?? > > > > > > In any case, I feel I have tried my best to run a node, and I don't accept > > > the premise anymore that I should shut up because I don't run a freenode > > > any > > > longer. I think some devs seem to forget that, despite all the yummies of > > > using linux and the lot, 90% is still using windows. If your windows > > > installer is a mess, then that is a major issue, not some far away > > > we'll-look-at-it-if-we-got-the-time thingy. > > > > It needs fixing. I have made this point on devl. Which you replied to! > > And few devls read *this* list. > > > > > > No doubt not everyone got this installerdifficulties, or otherwise someone > > > would have looked at it already, but I do remember that I, as well as > > > others, have reported difficulties with the wininstaller before. I think a > > > major overhaul and really testing all aspects of the wininstaller out > > > would > > > be a worthwhile thing. > > -- > > Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: not available > > Type: application/pgp-signature > > Size: 189 bytes > > Desc: Digital signature > > Url : > > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20041125/8559c84f/attachment-0001.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 5 > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:57:09 +0000 > > From: Toad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [freenet-support] and another thing > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > So he should link to the project page, first and foremost. That's called > > "doing your research". We could release a 0.6.0-pre1, but it'd be > > dubious... > > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 04:23:45PM +0100, Newsbyte wrote: > > > As I said on IRC, a collegue of mine has made an article (well, actually > > > more of a reference/pointer/short description) to freenet, and refered to > > > the sourceforge page. > > > > > > Maybe that seems like an obvious mistake, but in any case: why doesn't > > > anyone who can, update the f- page, there? It's still says 0.5.2.1 with as > > > date 17 july 2003(!!). Great impression that makes for people that arrive > > > there. > > > > > > Call it worthless what I say, but being mentioned on major putermagazines > > > is > > > not that easily to brush off. These kind of things will happen again, and > > > it's a total waste if we don't correct it, which can be done quite easily, > > > by updating it more regulary. > > > > > > I remember, btw, that I've said this before, even long before this article > > > came out. But I guess it wasn't worth any attention. After all, as I've > > > come > > > to understand, I never said anything worthwhile. > > > > > > And yes, I'm whining. I feel entitled too. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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] > > _______________________________________________ > 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] -- 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]
