Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication • Hacker News Board

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#201

Post by ogurechny » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:30 AM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #168

ogurechny wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean that helping some cold-blooded killers is okay, but after their percentage reaches some tipping point, it becomes too much of a headache? I can't say that I agree with that moral. One of the central ideas of Freenet (and some other projects) is that you don't know what exactly you transfer. Moreover, if you could discern “good content” from “bad content” in some general or specific fashion, you would instant…

> You mean that helping some cold-blooded killers is okay, but after their percentage reaches some tipping point, it becomes too much of a headache? I can't say that I agree with that moral. Participating in society inevitably helps some cold-blooded killers. But I wouldn't deliberately help out a group made of cold-blooded killers. So I think that moral makes sense. Which part would you disagree with? > If we follow…

No, the fate of bittorrent software is set in stone with that reasoning. “It generates how many terabits of piracy transfers per second globally? Across how many pirated works?” BAM! “Authors of torrent clients provide tools almost exclusively used by pirates. Stop or go to jail!” And if you really want that Ubuntu image, wait until your local Linux user group gets the package by international mail. Because your convenience is nothing compared to all that piracy, right?

Maybe you just want to say that all Freenet users are pedophiles. Maybe you want to think that all Freenet users are pedophiles to not think about other things. Maybe you want to state that “normal person” has no reason to use (and won't ever have to consider using) anything like it. It's your choice, thank you very much.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#202

Post by Dylan16807 » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:34 AM UTC

ogurechny wrote: post #201

Dylan16807 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You mean that helping some cold-blooded killers is okay, but after their percentage reaches some tipping point, it becomes too much of a headache? I can't say that I agree with that moral. Participating in society inevitably helps some cold-blooded killers. But I wouldn't deliberately help out a group made of cold-blooded killers. So I think that moral makes sense. Which part would you disagree with? > If we follow…

No, the fate of bittorrent software is set in stone with that reasoning. “It generates how many terabits of piracy transfers per second globally? Across how many pirated works?” BAM! “Authors of torrent clients provide tools almost exclusively used by pirates. Stop or go to jail!” And if you really want that Ubuntu image, wait until your local Linux user group gets the package by international mail. Because your conv…

> Maybe you just want to say that all Freenet users are pedophiles. Maybe you want to think that all Freenet users are pedophiles to not think about other things. Maybe you want to state that “normal person” has no reason to use (and won't ever have to consider using) anything like it. It's your choice, thank you very much.

Uh, no.

I just think it sometimes matters what the percent is. And I'm curious what the percent is.

I even ran a pretty stable freenet node at one point, thank you very much.

And you didn't really explain where your moral reasoning differs from mine. I'm not discussing what should be legal...

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#203

Post by noptd » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:37 AM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #11

The upshot of a project like Freenet is that no matter how noble the intentions, these days it's pretty much a CSAM distribution network and little else -- and if you publicly fess up to using it you'll be put on a list. This is why the future of the internet is censored, regulated platforms like FB, Twitter, and Reddit -- if you seek out uncensored platforms you are ipso facto up to no good because of the reputation…

Do you disagree with that view or are you supporting it?

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#204

Post by kafkaIncarnate » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:41 AM UTC

ikt wrote: post #141

amelius wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's in Bitcoin's blockchain too: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47130268

that's bitcoin sv which is not bitcoin

The principle remains, which makes it possible for anyone to do on any blockchain really. Encoding an image into the message of a transaction (or spanned over multiple transactions) should be fairly straightforward even with a simple bitcoin wallet. You should be able to make a CSAM NFT on Ethereum that nobody can expunge, as well.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#205

Post by djcapelis » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:44 AM UTC

cgtzczykldpq wrote: post #137

SilverRed wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was using some unofficial packages since installing java on my system is difficult so I used the first flatpak and the first docker image I found on google and neither of them shipped an included browser and it seemed like the way was to make firefox work with it but I could not work that out. It's been too long for me to remember the exact details but if I couldn't work out how to make it run as a long time linux…

Yeah there are no official flatpaks or docker images so you were using 3rd-party software and this is not Freenet's fault :) Perhaps you can update your topmost post to mention that? The official installers are here: https://freenetproject.org/pages/download.html Thanks for clarifying though!

Offering only a Java installer, of all things from the increasingly distant past, wholly divorced from any semblance on how most anyone wants to install or use software these days, is 100% a choice the freenet project made and entirely that project’s fault.

This type of uncaring about the user experience nonsense is exactly the type of issue that the person you’re replying to is sharing about their experience.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#206

Post by myrandomcomment » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:46 AM UTC

h_anna_h wrote: post #72

bitwize wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> which got us Trump and the current antivax movement I think that you are stretching it a bit here. Claiming that individualism is responsible for that seems unsubstantiated.

The problem with the 1st Amendment is that it protects all speech (in general, and if you quote yelling "fire" in a crowded theater you have not read the case law) no matter how stupid that speech is. The issue is that anything else could be a slippery slope to authoritarianism. Drawing that line is hard. Education is the key here however some people seems to be to stupid to be educated.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#207

Post by brokenmachine » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:53 AM UTC

stavros wrote: post #97

fortran77 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d bet you and I both would agree that we don’t like people who recklessly put themselves in a situation where they are at extreme risk to catch or spread COVID. If we were to have a forum that criticized people who won’t vaccinate, won’t distance, won’t wear protective masks, and promote unproven treatments would that be a “hate group?”

Yes. I visited /r/hermancainaward the other day becsuse I wanted to check it out, and I was stunned at how hateful the comments were against people who, sadly, had opinions that lead to their death. I was sad that people could be so misinformed/misled, but the subreddit seemed genuinely happy that these people died. That sounds very much like a hate group to me, and I'd like to see it as banned as fatpeoplehate (whic…

>instead of trying to somehow help

The most popular winners of the hermancainaward that you're lamenting the loss of are the kinds of people who would aggressively decline such help, and probably shout at you for offering it.

You may call me a bad person, but I was quietly hoping that Trump died from the pandemic he exacerbated and Bezos' rocket exploded in a blaze of justice. Those people wouldn't shed a tear for you or your family, why would you for them?

There's way too many people on this planet as it is, a couple less loud selfish drains on society wouldn't be too unfortunate.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#208

Post by cookiengineer » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:57 AM UTC

ogurechny wrote: post #144

ta988 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am glad it evolved a bit, it used to host a lot of child porn, nazi/fascist material etc And clearly you would be exposed to it through messages or not well annotated index.

This is interesting, I don't remember seeing more than trace amounts of “nazi/fascist material” there at all. Sure, someone has probably thought that the world needs another copy of Mein Kampf, or has had a real important story of how Jews did 9/11, and maybe these freesites are still (partially) available after a decade or so (I am not at all bothered to check, to be honest), but general amount of such loonies has d…

This is pretty much the identical argument of 4chan alt-right movements, where the value of free speech is primed so high that they do not think about collateral damage.

There's a reason books and movies have an age restriction. The reason is that kids are not able to understand the consequences. It's easy, as an adult, to rationalize that they see it eventually.

But if you had a welcome screen with some gore porn on your computer...would you a) use it in a public cafe? And b) use it in front of a kindergarden?

Why not? Exactly. The same reason why communities should be able to decide why they do not want to host gore porn on their companies.

Free speech works two ways. If I decide I dont like gore porn on my computer, but the peer to peer database/blockchain/whatever decides for redundancy purposes that my computer has to host it, I'm not gonna use that technology again.

Users must have the decision what kind of content they want to see. Otherwise it's gonna be the same propaganda machine all over again, where content of hate and emotions will persist longer than content of rationality and logic.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#209

Post by midev » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 3:58 AM UTC

adamrezich wrote: post #194

midev wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they can't be trusted to use their own logic and moral faculties to determine right from wrong History has shown this to be true over and over and over. We even have evidence to this: https://news.mit.edu/2018/study-twitter-false-news-travels-f... Fake news travels faster and convinces more people than the truth.

you would rather truth be determined by governments or corporations than left up to individuals to decide for themselves?

> you would rather truth be determined by governments or corporations than left up to individuals to decide for themselves?

Didn't say anything of the sort. And truth isn't determined by any of them. Which agin, proves the point. I had a comment with only three sentences, and you managed to misread it.

I'm not for corporate or government censorship, but people that can't read comments correctly are a much bigger problem.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#210

Post by kafkaIncarnate » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 4:07 AM UTC

ogurechny wrote: post #195

kafkaIncarnate wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I did not mean that. I meant what I said, not whatever you read. Which one of us is on drugs is up for debate. I do not believe the NSA is sitting around studying X-Files. They largely are analyzing and investigating large quantities of child porn and exploitation from southeast asia, rape and abuse in the middle east, cartel executions and kidnappings, war crimes and African slave trade, organ harvesting in China…

Let's say someone decided to buy a child slave on a Central Slave Market on Freenet. He would have a problem with that 5 years ago. And also 10 years ago. And also 15 years ago. Why? Because there never was a Central Slave Market, and no one was selling child slaves. Perhaps my memory fails me, and you have some links to fix my error? Please share. Before you say you can't remember the specifics, let me tell you that…

There was a messaging system before Frost. You can go look that up, I'm not doing this for you because you are calling me a troll, which is a great way to end civilized discourse and end any attempt at reasonable conversation.

I never said that a central slave market was on Freenet. I don't even think the protocol would be a very effective way to do it due to how slow and unreliable the protocol is at retrieving things. What I meant was that images of this stuff were available in large galleries, and the previous messaging system before Frost would auto-find new forums for you at random. Frequently they would be large galleries of images of this stuff.

So have fun with whatever you are expecting me to pull out of 20 years ago links that are like however many 40+ hex digits long. I haven't used Freenet since I saw that stuff. Not really sure why you'd think I would keep links to it or I would have a photographic memory or even would actively seek out the stuff.

I'm not sitting here saying I contributed, I'm saying I would play around with Freenet, even submit some harmless static HTML pages for fun to test the protocol. After the messaging system started popping up forums that I didn't find acceptable, I deleted the client and never touched Freenet again.

The burden of proof is not on me nor you. This is a conversation on the internet not a spontaneous scientific journal nor an inquisition.