4 ms·
"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
by cess11 5mo ago
"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/ https://freenet.org/about/faq/
- sanity 5mo agoHow is offering the user more choice with respect to anonymity changing the goals of the project?
- KaiserPro 5mo agothe _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)
- ArneBab 5mo agoyes, it chunks files, and aggregates multiple chunks per packet, and pads packets it sends around, so size analysis by the ISP cannot trace the path.
- sanity 5mo ago> the _point_ of freenet was that you could anonymously share/store information. As you can with the new Freenet, you just get a menu of options instead of being forced to use a one-size-fits-all approach to anonymity.
- cess11 5mo agoI 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".
- sanity 5mo agoIf we're doing archaeology, my original 1999 paper was called "A Distributed Decentralized Information Storage and Retrieval System".