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

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

freenetproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 443 posts

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

#361

Post by mhitza »

ArneBab wrote: post #234
mhitza wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like the early 2000's 4chan random board? Sarcasm aside, that experience sounds similar to what I've seen when trying out freenet way back. On the other hand my I2P experience was quite pleasant (by just following the planet.i2p stream, basically an announcement site for new "registered" domains and torrents), with easy discovery of downloadable leaks, anarchist and conspiracy theorist blogs. Really felt lik…

> way back Maybe you should try again. It is quite a different experience nowadays (if you just use what you see and don’t go digging for stuff to get angry about — if you do the latter, you’ll also find "the internet" to be a place full of disgusting evil).

Happy to hear that new user experience is different nowadays, and also the fact that there's time and money invested into continued Freenet development (as I've seen in other comments).

Maybe I'll give it a go next time when I muck around with anonymous P2P setups and protocols, until I get frustrated with the UX/DX, as always, and give up.

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

#362

Post by Nursie »

ogurechny wrote: post #189
genewitch wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About a quarter of all the comments above yours, other threads, etc, mention the same thing, this smells like astroturfing, but it is unclear by who. You can send illegal stuff by post, FedEx, BitTorrent, pgp encryption, etc. Who cares?

No, I've meant exactly what I've meant. There is an experience of seeing some links, and there's a conclusion that the network is mainly used by pedophiles. Even if all the data was 100% child porn (which is technically impossible, but whatever), I still can't see how the former transforms into the latter. Or maybe it was just parroting the “common knowledge”. Another kind of common knowledge is that law enforcement…

Sorry this is nonsense, seeing something outrageous within seconds of getting on freenet was also my experience about 15 years ago, and I certainly didn’t go looking for it.

Things may have improved on the common indexes since then, I’ve not been back to check, but you seek to whitewash and diminish the problem which is not great either.

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

#363

Post by h_anna_h »

CRConrad wrote: post #307
h_anna_h wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This also seems to be bi-partisan sadly.

I'm not so sure about that. Stands to reason, AFAICS, that "MY freedoms (and screw yours)!" ideologically resonates more on the right than the left: The whole left-right dichotomy is one of ~ "my freedoms above all" vs "freedoms for all, balanced with responsibility for all".

I think that this is extremely simplistic. For example it does not account for individualist anarchism or the collectivist "for our country/nation/race" pushed by various fascist governments.

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

#364

Post by h_anna_h »

user-the-name wrote: post #331
h_anna_h wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to be so hostile and toxic. I only mentioned it because this is an actual argument against TLS that I have seen being used in the past, even by popular sites such as pornhub for example (before being forced to enable TLS due to google downranking non-https sites). I also mentioned it because one of the points of TLS is to hide what kind of content is being accessed, so just like freenet you will not know whet…

You are saying THAT is the "hostile and toxic" response that is not in good faith, but you are fine with "Make sure to block TLS connections on every network that you manage. You don't know what naughty things your users might be doing after all. You would not want to help a criminal, would you?"

> that is not in good faith

I did not say that. I am sure that CRConrad is acting in good faith.

> but you are fine with

Yes, I explained why I said it in the post that you are replying to. My biggest mistake was using sarcasm to convey the message I guess.

Anyway, it would be nice if you focused on the essence of my post instead of the weak presentation of my last point.

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

#365

Post by h_anna_h »

noxer wrote: post #339
h_anna_h wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I showed that this is incorrect here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28587930 > You go to jail because what you said is actually a crime to say Sounds like the US. Just look at all these people who went to jail for crimes related to illegal numbers (eg. piracy). Or people like Mildred Gillars. Or the various whistleblowers.

Complete nonsense. If you voluntarily agree to not leak secrets and do so anyway its not protected under free speech. You also dont get jailed for speech but for the act of breaching some agreement or other law.

> If you voluntarily agree to not leak secrets and do so anyway its not protected under free speech

Of course it is. Anyway, I mentioned more cases where there is no voluntarily agreement.

> You also dont get jailed for speech but for the act of breaching some agreement or other law.

You can claim that for everyone who got jailed for speech.

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

#366

Post by h_anna_h »

quotemstr wrote: post #326
CRConrad wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's talk about Germany, to give one example. In that country, the top court can outright declare political parties illegal, if it believes that they constitute a threat to the democratic order. So what? Which country can't declare organisations illegal, if it determines them to be terrorist organisations? I'm pretty sure the USA can. So what does it matter if a terrorist organisation calls itself a "party"? (Didn…

In the US, an idea can't be a "terrorist organization". In Germany, it can be. I much prefer the US model of free speech. Free speech only for ideas that the government doesn't consider dangerous isn't free speech at all.

> In the US, an idea can't be a "terrorist organization". In Germany, it can be

This is false.

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

#367

Post by ogurechny »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #202
ogurechny wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 percen…

No, the percentage reasoning is wrong completely. There is a well known novel that ties “acceptable” percentage of suffering “when living in a society”, geometric progression of “good” expected to result from killing someone, and an actual pawn broker whose percent is considered too high to be “fair”. A century and a half later, people still don't get it.

We can make that calculating approach universal. What percent of your neighbors is not good enough in general? What percent of all people on Earth? If we start close inspections, we will find that not a lot of people pass the test… and the rest can inevitably be discarded and excluded. Let's not forget about yourself, what's your percentage? Are you good enough to join other Freenet users? That's the opposite side of original question.

Moral choice can not be calculated, it turns into something else when one does it.

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

#368

Post by ArneBab »

xvilka wrote: post #348
quotemstr wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it be impossible to run Java on low performance machines? There have been mobile and embedded Java implementations for literally decades. C++ doesn't magically imbue a program with performance superpowers either. It's lazy to equate implementation language with performance profile.

> Why would it be impossible to run Java on low performance machines? In some abstract case - yes, it's possible. In many concrete cases, including I2P, Java-written code is quite resources-consuming for anything close to the router hardware.

In the concrete case, Freenet runs quite well on a Pi3. Just do not activate the Sone- and WoT-plugin (they are quite resource-hungry).

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

#369

Post by CRConrad »

test542 wrote: post #357
CRConrad wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, because you're perfectly willing to accept that your "free speech!" can't compel someone else to operate their printing press for you... But a server on the Internet is such a totally different thing, for sure! IOW: This ancient figure of speech is used precisely to show that the issue is exactly the same old one that has been thoroughly hashed out for centuries.

Would you like to try that again?

No, thanks, I'm good and done.

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

#370

Post by ellyagg »

bananamerica wrote: post #263

Everyone wants absolute free speech until their platform is taken over by conspiracy freaks, white supremacists, nazis, and anti vaxxers...

No, I definitely want absolute free speech so folks can safely talk about taboo subjects. Not being able to have a forum to discuss taboo subjects is a creeping evil, IMO.
Post reply on HN