Re: Re: the plutocratic world of freenet

On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 12:32:55PM +0200, daniele wrote:
> That would be true if there where only one or few auto-requester robots 
> (ARR). But if governments, politicians, corporations etc... will 
> discover a new audience in freenet, they will not think two times about 
> setting up ARRs.
> 
> Each ARR that comes into freenet, will decrease the time non-ARR content 
> can stay in the network, and increase the time it will need to spread 
> itself.

Flooding is possible. But on the darknet it is pretty hard to flood out
the whole network. Obviously having a large network to start with would
also help.
> 
> The same effect is due to popular files. Suppose there where many big 
> and very popular files around the network.  A publisher will see that 
> his content is very slow, and has a limited permanence, compared to the 
> popular files. So he say: "my file will difficultly become popular if it 
> is so slow and uncertain compared to popular ones. let's set up an ARR 
> so users will gain speed and my content will have a granted permanence 
> and integrity".

If his content is popular it will rapidly become available quickly. As
far as deliberate attacks go, see above.
> 
> Imagine a freenet where each, *EACH* publisher auto-requests its content 
> at minimum 100.000 times a day with a costly server. It's obvious that 
> between them they have approximatively the same impact on the net, so 
> they have the same "right to speek".
> But a poor publisher, without a costly ARR, will never be able to spread 
> its content. Because the "limit of popularity" is too high. The time to 
> get it would be so enormous from a user, that many will give up, not 
> raising popularity.  The minimum requirement to have a decent 
> reachability and permanence it would be 100.000rqs/day or little less...
> 
> That's nothing new.
> It's the same as in real democracy.
> It has always been very very difficult to combine free speach, right to 
> listen, and MONEY.

It's the love of money that is the root of all evil, not money itself.
Flooding is possible, but it can be made expensive by having a large
network, and very difficult by having a darknet. An analogy: the gap
between super-rich and average isn't so huge that it is practical to buy
the entire electorate, in western democracies. Because there are very
many of them, and they're not *that* poor.
-- 
Matthew J Toseland - toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

_______________________________________________
chat mailing list
[email protected]
Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat
Or mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDEGvyHzsuOmVUoi0RAq1IAJ9+j83oDYGHWa3JZYbBGGphNjOGzwCfUPdz
EDFutZ7bv49PqFUFZtGx93I=
=xcJ7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----