Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

freenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 302 posts

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#181

Post by avwert »

sanity wrote: post #140
bglusman wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t respond to your response below but I fully agree “a lot of online criticism is not actually about truth-seeking or honest disagreement”, but I believe by ignoring the principle of charity, you undercut your own credibility and value. You may be able to show people how and where they’re in the wrong by demonstrating how THEY’VE made motive and framing the entire point, WITHOUT personally ascribing that as nece…

You need to remember the context. I was in the midst of obviously baseless allegations being made against me, not because of anything I actually said but because some very nasty[1] people disagreed with a naming decision I had made. If you ever find yourself in that situation you are way past the principle of charity. I'm not saying I couldn't have handled it more gracefully and probably would today, remember this wa…

HN is full of those types of people, always wanting to tear others down over perceived offenses while contributing nothing much themselves.

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#182

Post by Timwi »

sanity wrote: post #104
koolba wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it work in practice? Is it sorted by timestamp and content hash for uniqueness?

Messages in river are sorted by timestamp using a (non-cryptographic) hash of the message signature as tie-breaker, essentially a content hash. One weakness is that we trust the message author to provide an accurate message timestamp, however bad behavior such as manipulating timestamps can be addressed by banning the user from the room.

If due to some technical glitch someone's timestamp is just off by a minute or something, I wouldn't exactly call that “bad behavior” that warrants banning someone, but it does mess with ordering in a chat application...

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#183

Post by sanity »

tardedmeme wrote: post #171
kstrauser wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WTF. These are some of the first things I clicked through on that page: - https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/msg5534... - https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/msg5534... Gee, I can't imagine how that mailing list could ever be toxic.

Why is it always people like this who run projects that should be good? SimpleX, Xlibre, Freenet Locutus, that's three, and I'm sure there are more. Edit: do they all like the letter X, too? I think in this list it's just a coincidence, but maybe? Edit because I can't post a new comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46608061

Thank you for putting me in such great company!

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#184

Post by SiempreViernes »

nextgens wrote: post #170
sanity wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are the goals different?

I've abstained form interfering until now... but have you honestly forgotten? Please explain how "the new freenet" tackles censorship resistance. https://web.archive.org/web/20001017133926/http://freenetpro... "Freenet is a peer-to-peer network designed to allow the distribution of information over the Internet in an efficient manner, without fear of censorship." https://web.archive.org/web/20050201110519/http://free…

Are there any success stories about Hyphanet's censorship resistance mattering? Beyond serving run-of-the mill copyrigh violations (and probably child porn) I never heard anything about the content on Hyphanet.

Even now when people in the US are organising against a fascist regime it's mostly WhatsApp and maybe Signal.

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#185

Post by KaiserPro »

sanity wrote: post #166
cess11 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Anonymity: While the previous version was designed with a focus on anonymity, the current version does not offer built-in anonymity but allows for a choice of anonymizing systems to be layered on top." https://freenet.org/about/faq/

How is offering the user more choice with respect to anonymity changing the goals of the project?

the _point_ of freenet was that you could anonymously share/store information. For better or worse, that was the point of it. It also drove the UX and tradeoffs for the network.

It was slower than Kazaa/bittorrent, but it was far harder to work out who was shareing what. (if memory serves it also chunked files up so they weren;t on the same machine, but that could be me misremembering)

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#186

Post by nextgens »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #184
nextgens wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've abstained form interfering until now... but have you honestly forgotten? Please explain how "the new freenet" tackles censorship resistance. https://web.archive.org/web/20001017133926/http://freenetpro... "Freenet is a peer-to-peer network designed to allow the distribution of information over the Internet in an efficient manner, without fear of censorship." https://web.archive.org/web/20050201110519/http://free…

Are there any success stories about Hyphanet's censorship resistance mattering? Beyond serving run-of-the mill copyrigh violations (and probably child porn) I never heard anything about the content on Hyphanet. Even now when people in the US are organising against a fascist regime it's mostly WhatsApp and maybe Signal.

Thank you for the downvotes.

You're moving the debate here. The question was "How are the goals different?" from the project leader (who ought to know better), not whether moving them makes sense.

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#187

Post by sanity »

Timwi wrote: post #182
sanity wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Messages in river are sorted by timestamp using a (non-cryptographic) hash of the message signature as tie-breaker, essentially a content hash. One weakness is that we trust the message author to provide an accurate message timestamp, however bad behavior such as manipulating timestamps can be addressed by banning the user from the room.

If due to some technical glitch someone's timestamp is just off by a minute or something, I wouldn't exactly call that “bad behavior” that warrants banning someone, but it does mess with ordering in a chat application...

It could, but it hasn't been a problem in practice. If it becomes one we can certainly address it.

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#188

Post by KaiserPro »

sanity wrote: post #90
outside2344 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A wise boss of mine, after reading a set of threads that I wrote like this, asked me to go think for a day on the difference between "being right" and "being effective." Some of the things you say in these threads might be "right" but I can assure you that many of them are not effective, which is counterproductive to the goal you are trying to achieve.

I prefer to say what I believe to be true rather than live in fear of how people looking to take offense might misconstrue something. A culture where people are expected to constantly self-censor to avoid bad-faith interpretations is unhealthy and corrosive.

> I prefer to say what I believe to be true rather than live in fear of how people looking

Again, as we are wondering into tumblr style debates here (ie not listening and just saying what you think they said)

There is a difference between being "right" and being "effective"

Or to put it another way: "perfect is the enemy of good"

However I will break it down a bit more. You agree with me that there is such thing as a horizon of "acceptable opinion" for people? Some have larger windows, some much narrower.

If we agree on that, I would ask, what happens if someone goes in hard (rhetorically) with a viewpoint that is outside of "acceptable opinion"? You begin to discount their opinion, regardless of evidence. Or it requires a much high bar to accept _any_ opinion from that person.

Which leads back to the original point, you may be correct, but you are unable to persuade anyone else that you are correct, because you are not speaking the same language and gently pulling them to your viewpoint.

Hence the "you can be right, or you can be effective"

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#189

Post by cess11 »

sanity wrote: post #166
cess11 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Anonymity: While the previous version was designed with a focus on anonymity, the current version does not offer built-in anonymity but allows for a choice of anonymizing systems to be layered on top." https://freenet.org/about/faq/

How is offering the user more choice with respect to anonymity changing the goals of the project?

I kind of see "focus" in the FAQ and "goals" in this thread as interchangeable.

It would surprise me if this would not be a common interpretation of these texts alone among the readers here.

As for the general reputation of the OG Freenet in this lineage, to the extent I'm aware, anonymity was pretty much the defining characteristic. More or less everything else in the user experience suffered to some extent compared to other chat and file sharing services because of this "focus".

Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps

#190

Post by GJim »

koolba wrote: post #101
pikdum wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm not a fan. Feels like this project is trying to get popular off of Freenet's name recognition rather than its own merits.

The submitter is the creator of the original Freenet. If anybody gets to decide what we will call Freenet, it’s him.

> If anybody gets to decide what we will call Freenet, it’s him.

Perhaps.

Though reusing the name for an entirely different project with a different codebase is disingenuous to say the least.

That won't do his reputation any good, especially in a field where reputation matters.

Post reply on HN