Re: Some ideas on Freenet architecture

Matthew John Toseland <[email protected]> Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:01:12 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.network.freenet.devel
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On 03/09/17 20:53, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Hi toad,
> 
> Matthew John Toseland <[email protected]> writes:
>> Thoughts? I'm not a dev any more, but thinking about Bitcoin and other
>> stuff maybe there are some ways forward that we've missed...
>>
>> Dispute resolution, spam and distributed data structures
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> A key is disputable if:
> …
>> For any disputable key, any darknet node can vote at most once.
> 
> Can you explain why we would want to bind darknet nodes (=real life
> identities) to voting about content? Currently this is done in the truly
> pseudonymous inner layer.
> 
> What is the gain from disputable keys?

Because it's our only source of scarcity. The whole objective of this
part of the proposal is to create spam-proof, adequately-scalable
distributed keyword search. Or distributed data structures of whatever
other kind, where we can maintain the structure in a collaborative
manner, obtaining a consensus, without having to poll every outbox and
every fork.

IMHO this is one of the remaining fundamental research questions for
Freenet.

It's that or a block chain. And we don't want a block chain.

Or stick to the current approach of hoping that outbox polling scales
well enough. But even if it works for chat I doubt it will work well for
search. I believe my proposal will scale further even for chat.

And I'm not binding them - it's no more traceable than any other key AFAICS?
> 
> Best wishes,
> Arne
>

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)