Earlier quoted context omitted.
Holy shit. I’m a long-time admirer of freenet and you just single handedly destroyed any positive view of the project I may have held. Get a fucking grip and seek help if you can’t.
[flagged]
What? I don’t understand.
Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
91–100 of 302 posts
Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#92Earlier 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.
[flagged]
Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#93Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are tons of sybil-proof systems if you don't include signal from sources by default, but instead opt them in by hand. E.g. use a web of trust and then choose who you trust. It doesn't matter if there are trillions of accounts you don't trust, because you don't trust them.
Which isn't a web of trust. it is just an "allowlist". Humans are vulnerable to sybil attacks too.
An allow-list with transitive trust is a web of trust. And I said "use a web of trust", not "use an allow-list", because I really did mean "web of trust".
And sure, they can be, if they adopt patterns that allow it. I can also find plenty of counter-examples. I don't think "humans are less vulnerable to sybil attacks than automated systems" is a weakly-defensible stance at all.
Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
[flagged]
Sure, then just avoid me and I'll avoid you and we'll both be happier.
Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#96Earlier 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.
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#97Earlier 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.
Not sure what you mean but I stand by every word I said in that thread.
If you think this is a correct communication style for someone who thinks they're a leader, I suggest getting an assistant to write your correspondence, or maybe some socialisation bootcamp.
This is grim.
If you stand by it I'd say good.... luck, yeah, good luck, you're singlehandedly the gravest enemy of the project.
Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#98Re: Show HN: Freenet, a peer-to-peer platform for decentralized apps
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure what you mean but I stand by every word I said in that thread.
If you think this is a correct communication style for someone who thinks they're a leader, I suggest getting an assistant to write your correspondence, or maybe some socialisation bootcamp. This is grim. If you stand by it I'd say good.... luck, yeah, good luck, you're singlehandedly the gravest enemy of the project.
Yes, I stand by what I wrote. I'm not going to pretend otherwise because someone dug up an old mailing list post.
If you think a specific statement was wrong, harmful, or dishonest, then explain why. I'll wait.