The Future Of Emule Ideas for new developments of P2P tech.
#1
Posted 01 January 2006 - 08:35 PM
This project can be done by the P2P nets cheaper and faster, eMule can do it before they can even react. ¡Go faster that the bureaucracy! Ask the collaboration of all eMule users, offer them the chance to built the biggest Library ever. (books, music, articles, magazines, videos etc..). Propose to each user to scan one book a week, or any other content, that does not show in eMule list...(To make it properly would be needed to attach each archive with wider information than usual eMule standards, but this is not so much work) We can make it !with no cost! in record time. It would offer a real service to the net community. Let the politicians find later the solution about legal matters. Once its done we'll see who decides to destroy it...Nobody is gonna want to renounce to it…And this could be also the definitive salvation or even glorification of the P2P nets. Working in the widest collaboration ever (millions of people).
I suggest to start a little brainstorming about it. I really believe we can make it… In fact we all have already start doing it…
#2
Posted 01 January 2006 - 08:44 PM
eMule is a P2P software NOT an online library NOT a download manager NOT an IM client etc.
Just because something is possible doesn't mean you should do it.
Good day.
#3
Posted 01 January 2006 - 09:01 PM
This post has been edited by trefertere: 01 January 2006 - 09:22 PM
#4
Posted 01 January 2006 - 09:43 PM
The reason the developers shouldn't spent their limited time in making eMule anything else but the best P2P client out there is that their time, as I stated at the beginning of this very long sentence, is limited.
#5
Posted 01 January 2006 - 11:28 PM
trefertere, on Jan 1 2006, 08:35 PM, said:
...........
I suggest to start a little brainstorming about it. I really believe we can make it… In fact we all have already start doing it…
Personally I think that emule/ed2k is becoming a good way to collect knoledge/books/materials and I also ecourage users to add more copyleft documentation and material/books to their share to share them in a p2p way.
I think that no change is needed.lat detail , to scan cpyrighted books is not legal, and emule is not intended in this way.(IMHO)
#6
Posted 03 January 2006 - 08:28 PM
Maybe some Yahoo, MS and AOL may dispute its supremacy.
Nobody wants state owned French European commision administration to control and rule over literature, with one exception YOU trefertere.
Staying out of control is the purpose of emule and the same spirit is that who brings Google into e-book business against the will of the national and socialists.
#7
Posted 04 January 2006 - 01:11 PM
And by the way, don't underestimate the power of the states, or even the EU commission, they may be a little lost, but they control nearly the 50% of the total money and all the legal triggers yet... Will be better to all if they see something positive in eMule...
This post has been edited by trefertere: 04 January 2006 - 04:26 PM
#8
Posted 04 January 2006 - 02:08 PM
* * *
eMule has enough anti-corruption measures.
-- SF, Oct 30 2005, 07:08 PM
#10
Posted 04 January 2006 - 05:22 PM
-- E. W. Dijkstra
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
-- Pablo Picasso
#11
Posted 05 January 2006 - 01:48 AM
But I would like to focus in other aspect of your post: the discredit of the word control. One way to consider this is to see it as part of a general problem of modern societies; the lack of any kind of respected authority, (not even scientific one). This situation is fruit of a long historical process to long to consider here, but the dark side of it is that nearly always ends in the rule of the stronger, or translated in actual words, the rule of the one who can display the most powerful propaganda... And impose his truth, his version of history or even his version of the evolution...
Lately all western democracies are in this cynical path, and as a consequence of it, arises in the individuals the reluctance to “outsource” any kind of control, driving to a increasing isolation (of dubious free individuals) that with the parallel refusal of “protection” from any collective institution lets the individual even more defenceless. ¿Does the net (with his horizontal relations between individuals and free emergent structures) offer a solution to this cul-de-sac? ¿Can the net produce a new source of authority and representative legitimacy? Because at the end of the road, this is the real question: if the net can develop a most efficient, representative and transparent way of organising societies than actual democratic representation. If it does not, actual politicians or gigantic multinationals will rule the net (including P2P nets) earlier or later. And not to our benefit I fear.
Here is where my original proposition was pointing to, show -with one example; the global Library- that P2P technologies can actually beat and overcome in efficiency or even quality, political structures or the best private companies. Here I think we have a good chance to see (and show) our potential, (if developers as niRRity find time -and motivation- to do it, of course )
#12
Posted 05 January 2006 - 01:15 PM
trefertere, on Jan 5 2006, 02:48 AM, said:
No.
#13
Posted 11 January 2006 - 06:32 AM
What is stopping people from doing this?
Maybe a few reasons that can also apply to the current discussion (library)
Maybe people are too lazy.
Maybe eMule reaches too few people.
Maybe people do not see eMule as a medium for there extreme ideals (or whatever it may be they want to publish) (probably linked to eMule's popularity)
But maybe this is actually happening, but the modified sources are commented as fake, or the modified version is too unpopular to spread.
The point is: It doesnt actually matter what it is, users must assume its wrong.
This is disappointing, but its the way of the net:
Files downloaded (from the internet) must now be assumed to contain malware.
Chatrooms are assumed to contain multiple creepy guys that want to molest you.
User generated (unregulated) content must be assumed to be false.
That said, eMule allready is a library. Its just user generated.
Users upload/share files they want to.
So trefertere my friend, all you have to do is upload your library.
People will assume its wrong (well, I will anyway ) and I doubt it will gather much attention (sorry if that sounds harsh its just that P2P is full of people wanting to steal stuff )
Wouldnt the idea be better as a database/webpage anyway?
P.S.
Hi all again!
This post has been edited by fractal.design: 11 January 2006 - 06:34 AM
#14
Posted 11 January 2006 - 07:07 AM
#15
Posted 11 January 2006 - 09:04 AM
hows it going everyone!?
Whats happend eMule wise over the last ages?
seems like 46c is still the latest build... :/
is development stalled or something?
[/hijack]
#16
Posted 11 January 2006 - 05:15 PM
trefertere, on Jan 2 2006, 07:31 AM, said:
I think its future is pretty safe...
fractal.design, on Jan 11 2006, 07:34 PM, said:
It's development has never been all the fast, and its got almost all the features it needs currently so refining it may take a little longer than in the past...
This post has been edited by NksTV: 11 January 2006 - 05:17 PM
#17
Posted 11 January 2006 - 06:46 PM
fractal.design, on Jan 11 2006, 08:32 AM, said:
Yes you can. It's not an issue what you can do, though. It's an issue of discovery. If I wanted a trusted link I go to a trusted link site. I don't search through emule. If I want to search for emule I'm prepared that the content can be fake/bad.
Emule/Kad/Servers needs to add search by public key as implemented in the emulecollections. Yet even then someone must take the time to verify each release and sign it with his private key. No matter how you look at it Authority is necessary (not saying that Government is necessary).
-- E. W. Dijkstra
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
-- Pablo Picasso
#18
Posted 11 January 2006 - 07:16 PM
gcostanza, on Jan 4 2006, 09:22 AM, said:
But doesn't Wikipedia log every redaction in the History? That makes is a lot harder to get away with vandalism for very long. And Wikipedia does have a few select moderators, contrary to what most people think. I don't know if any of you have been following the eBaum debacle recently, but that article was locked down for a while by one of the mods due to extreme vandalism due to vigilante action. I'm just saying that Wikipedia isn't as anarchic as some of you guys make it out to be.Math is delicious!
MmMm! Mauna Loa Milk Chocolate Toffee Macadamias are little drops of Heaven ^_^
Si vis pacem, para bellum DIE SPAMMERS DIE!
#19
Posted 11 January 2006 - 08:52 PM
The question is "Is Truth some average of what the majority of people think" or is there "Absolute Truth" and if there is absolute truth who has the authority to establish it? Where do knowledge and truth come from? And is half-truth or false-truth dangerous or is it just a waiste of time?
With real books my trust is bigger. It costs a lot to print a book therefore it's quite costly to spread false information in books as well. In fact it's antieconomic so as long as publishers are economic entities they can be trusted quite a lot, not to mention authors who are still alive can directly exert control themselves.
P.S: I'm a big fan of wikipedia.
-- E. W. Dijkstra
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
-- Pablo Picasso
#20
Posted 11 January 2006 - 10:47 PM
Quote
Ever heard of the "Bible" ?