rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Sun Nov 29 19:45:28 CET 2009
I think that most people want to think of P2P as advancing a commons
constructed of goods that people share justly from their own value/labor.
I suppose that sharing to avoid persecution is another side of that. In
some cases it is sharing to avoid property laws...to many, a form of theft
as we have discussed with regard to Pirate Bay in the recent press...which I
think most who discuss things here dismissed as sub-moral.
Freenet strikes me as mostly an aim to avoid political persecution. If
someone in Pakistan wants to read a banned book or see a pornographic
video...or if someone in Burma wants to learn to make a bomb. Hard to say
what the morality of these things are. Posting copyright materials simply
for the sake of avoiding costs seems offensive. But I may be more
judgmental than most on that particular point.
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Ted Smith <teddks at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-29 at 09:02 -0500, Ryan Lanham wrote:
> > A different side of P2P...
> > http://freenetproject.org/
> How is this a "different side" of p2p, exactly? Freenet seems to me to
> be a p2p network like any other, though I suppose you could say that it
> isn't "pure" p2p or something because it is sometimes f2f.
> Using peer-to-peer networks for privacy and anonymity seems to be a very
> common side of p2p, though that may just be my perspective...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the p2presearch