Re: [freehaven-dev] Re: [Freenet-chat] MojoNation

[David Hopwood <hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Roger Dingledine wrote:
[...]
> One of the issues common to each of these publishing services is that we
> need to solve the accountability problem: we need to make sure people
> don't flood the system and use up all of our resources. The resource most
> commonly addressed is space, but other resources to address include
> bandwidth between servers and clients, and bandwidth between servers and
> servers.
> 
> Projects take many different approaches to solving this problem:
> 
> * Freenet dumps unpopular data on the floor, so people flooding the system
>   with unpopular data are ultimately ignored.
> * Gnutella doesn't 'publish' your documents anywhere except on your
>   computer, so there's no way you can flood other systems.
> * Publius limits the submission size to 100k and hopes that nobody
>   will fill them with garbage (it remains to be seen how successful this
>   will be -- it sounds dubious, doesn't it).
> * Free Haven requires publishers to provide reliable space of their own
>   if they want to insert documents into the system. This economy of
>   reputation tries to ensure that people donate to the system in
>   proportion to how much space they use.

Another interesting model is Intermemory (www.intermemory.org), which has a
space overhead of n times due to use of an information dispersal algorithm,
but only allows each user to publish documents totalling an n'th of the space
they contribute to the system. In practice n would be about 5. The problem
with this is that it doesn't allow any way to benefit from the generosity of
people who are willing to contribute space, but don't take advantage of
their full publishing quota.

- -- 
David Hopwood <hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>

Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/
RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5  0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01
Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a
public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been
seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBOZKHLTkCAxeYt5gVAQEHvAgAv09iURBErcgDgg9ICoB1Gi99z499AkUA
pMSgEbYm08gDTZgYAwI13/mi9LqVv6MOLkC2rYxSu1DXXsLLMaR2/eePCrdAITyP
A7+9TnhcjS3ED7gM/k8SxunJE8wzetyOVZExEwgn6JZU42PH/V5YfB4nNLYzhecp
29yNVWRRt4rXg26y4LXAChrarqS2bNH4ZVphARw0BBNqU8n1HNnfyg4PNDR+aY21
Lr4kAVBrgd5ltf2g+tzDsrAd3qBXZwGoFRNAIXokLXx+ZurM2nOKBW3IC5uc8rac
WCXzxd7Gh9cDbMJesgTniVaneW9wDMbpvdJL6H2UEU8Z8DVW6r7/iA==
=tGxN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----