From toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Mon Mar 5 15:06:52 2007 From: toad at amphibian.dyndns.org (Matthew Toseland) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 15:06:52 +0000 Subject: [freenet-chat] "Taking Freenet Seriously" Message-ID: <20070305150652.GA29425@amphibian.dyndns.org> ----- Caco_Patane at wSB9c9U4QIHFiC5tLyldDBS7sjg ----- 2007.02.28 - 11:46:38GMT ----- (Source: http://uchicagolaw.typepad.com/faculty/2005/10/taking_freenet_.html) Taking Freenet Seriously: A Response to Picker on Peer-to-Peer Randy raises a fascinating question below about the appropriate uses for Peer-to-Peer technologies, and he and Tim Wu have begun an interesting dialogue in the comments. Let me suggest an alternative answer to Tim?s. Peer-to-Peer technologies have substantial utility in those circumstances where anonymity or decentralization are desirable. So, as Ian Clarke has long argued with respect to Freenet, peer-to-peer can be an effective mechanism for enabling free political speech in those parts of the world that have repressive governments. It is relatively easy for a repressive government to shut down one or a dozen central servers, but virtually impossible for them to shut down all content-hosting peers, unless they?re willing to turn off Internet access altogether. Similarly, with central severs, it is much easier to compile a list of the Internet addresses belonging to content downloaders, but much harder to do this effectively when the distribution channels are peer-to-peer. There is enormous potential for these kinds of technologies to promote freedom and democracy in authoritarian regimes and robust, uninhibited debate in freer societies where legal liability concerns and social norms constrain discourse unduly. At the same time, anonymity and decentralization have substantial downsides in the speech context. Darknets facilitate child pornography distribution. Peer-to-peer allows privacy-invading MPEG files to spread across the globe in hours, well before any court can intervene with injunctive relief. And anonymity and decentralization on P2P can contribute to the rapid spread of computer viruses, thwarting efforts to control viruses through the imposition of legal liability on content providers and disseminators. So we have an environment in which P2P creates substantial speech-related benefits and speech-related harms. In these settings, we can resolve this issue in one of two ways: Compare the magnitude of the benefits and harms (This is what the Ginsburg concurrence in Grokster seemed to want to do ? More people want to use Grokster to obtain porn than political theory); or give the benefit of the doubt to the ?more speech is better? philosophy, and tolerate many less savory uses of P2P for the benefit of the occasional blessed use (This seems closer to Breyer?s view of Sony in Grokster.). The former is how the law usually handles economic policy questions, and the latter, I think, is how it handles many free speech questions. So doesn?t this all boil down to the question of ?What is Peer to Peer use: Economic conduct or speech?? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20070305/f68b5fa3/attachment.pgp From scarreigns at gmail.com Thu Mar 8 02:52:38 2007 From: scarreigns at gmail.com (Taka Khumbartha) Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:52:38 -0700 Subject: [freenet-chat] "Taking Freenet Seriously" In-Reply-To: <20070305150652.GA29425@amphibian.dyndns.org> References: <20070305150652.GA29425@amphibian.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <45EF7A76.5050903@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 i was about to post some comments, but then i realized this discussion is about 1.5 years old. :\ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFF73pwXhfCJNu98qARCOp+AKCXhKiyv2VRSsGJCC6WTTCLWv2TNQCdGMaQ 5GSA6UrqFIMJGBHq2D/bmck= =77yX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jeremy.a.love at gmail.com Mon Mar 19 17:50:52 2007 From: jeremy.a.love at gmail.com (Jeremy Love) Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:50:52 -0600 Subject: [freenet-chat] Google Summer of Code Message-ID: <18aed8a40703191050r1a050b81p2c1ffecd4fc26768@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I'm very interested in writing a C++ library for FCP 2.0 as listed on the ideas page for GSoC. I know that there's an IRC room for Freenet, but I'm having difficulty connected any IRC server from school. So, I decided that the mailing-list would be my next best option. Anyway, I'd actually like to get in touch with a mentor or anyone else involved with GSoC. My email address is Jeremy.A.Love at gmail.com. As far as instant messaging I do have Google Talk, but I don't use it much. I hope to hear from you guys soon. Thank you. -- Jeremy Love Computer Science Major Baylor University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20070319/738a79c1/attachment.htm From nextgens at freenetproject.org Sat Mar 31 14:23:25 2007 From: nextgens at freenetproject.org (Florent =?iso-8859-1?Q?Daigni=E8re_=28NextGen$=29?=) Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:23:25 +0200 Subject: [freenet-chat] Server downtime Message-ID: <20070331142324.GA5053@freenetproject.org> Hi, As most of you have probably noticed, the server has suffered of downtimes recently ... It's a known issue: we have moved it physically to a new chassis because of hardware problems. I would have announced it if it was planned ^-^ Everything ought to be back online now, tell me if it's not. Some additionnal downtime will probably be necessary soon (to update the kernel) but I will schedule and notice mailing lists before proceeding. NextGen$ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/chat/attachments/20070331/7ad7ee6a/attachment.pgp