|
infinity0x (June 6, 2008 at 11:55 pm)
this misses the point. there is no such concept of "a copy" in this network - at least not in a sense visible to the user. copies of the various packets are sent and purged based on demand.
cam8001 (May 8, 2008 at 4:32 pm)
Could you just do this using FXP?
007luke666 (April 17, 2008 at 2:26 pm)
48:32 (!)
pav930t (March 16, 2008 at 4:45 pm)
On the point you make at 6.37 about data movement - I have always wanted someone to develop a distributed file system that supports an unlimited file size but more importantly when i select a file from another machine to be copied to yet another machine i dont want it to do 2 copies, one to me and then another to the destination machine, just one copy from the source to the destination.
Does your file system support this? If so, do you have any downloads?
djfetmage (March 9, 2008 at 8:50 pm)
Wow, a commercial freenet
DrDabbles (March 5, 2008 at 10:08 pm)
No. Copyright and ease of sharing are two different issues. This simply lets you easily access files from anywhere, including the sharing of files with other users.
dominikgrolimund (January 18, 2008 at 6:34 pm)
we only see files that have been made public. all private / shared files we don't see and we can't encrypt, since your password never leaves your computer.
dominikgrolimund (January 18, 2008 at 6:31 pm)
i think i didn't explain that point well enough. let's say you revoke access to a folder to marc. then marc doesn't have access to that folder anymore immediately.
lazy revocation is only on a technical level: only if marc had a hacked client which would keep the access key to that folder, he could decrypt the files he had access to before as long as there are no changes to the folder (add, edit, remove). see our cryptree paper or lazy revocation in general for details.
MaZe741 (January 17, 2008 at 7:11 pm)
This imo is the beginning of the end of copyright.... right? a huge scale professional p2p network and easy to use? bomb!
den1s12 (January 15, 2008 at 1:01 pm)
Hi Dominik,
Nice work, I have a little concern though. How will you manage the balance between the stored and the uploaded data on the long run (when the google servers are out of the picture) if let's say every user wants to upload 7g, which represents 35g in the system, but on the other hand "only" 10g data is stored at every peer? |
