← Back to context

Comment by sanity

3 days ago

> Notably this project was conceived by a backroom decision to dump the original Freenet development team's work,

This is a false narrative, from the Freenet FAQ[1]:

Why was Freenet rearchitected and rebranded?

In 2019, Ian began developing a successor to the original Freenet, internally named “Locutus.” This redesign was a ground-up reimagining, incorporating lessons learned from the original Freenet and addressing modern challenges. The original Freenet, although groundbreaking, was built for an earlier era.

This isn’t the first time Freenet has undergone significant changes. Around 2005, we transitioned from version 0.5 to 0.7, which was a complete rewrite introducing “friend-to-friend” networking.

In March 2023, the original Freenet (developed from 2005 onwards) was spun off into an independent project called “Hyphanet” under its existing maintainers. Concurrently, “Locutus” was rebranded as “Freenet,” also known as “Freenet 2023,” to signal this new direction and focus. The rearchitected Freenet is faster, more flexible, and better equipped to offer a robust, decentralized alternative to the increasingly centralized web.

To ease the transition the old freenetproject.org domain was redirected to hyphanet’s website, while the recently acquired freenet.org domain was used for the new architecture.

It is important to note that the maintainers of the original Freenet did not agree with the decision to rearchitect and rebrand. However, as the architect of the Freenet Project, and after over a year of debate, Ian felt this was the necessary path forward to ensure the project’s continued relevance and success in a world far different than when he designed the previous architecture.

> The new "Freenet" does not have anonymity as a design goal anymore,

Because the new Freenet will have a menu of anonymity options rather than committing to a one-size-fits-all approach, while also addressing the issue of illegal content[2].

[1] https://freenet.org/about/faq/#why-was-freenet-rearchitected...

[2] https://freenet.org/about/faq/#how-does-freenet-handle-harmf...

112 comments

sanity

Reply
qcl820DV34  3 days ago

> and after over a year of debate

There was no "year of debate".

You came to the mailing list and announced it for the first time as a finalized decision already,

without any prior debate with the original team.

The "board" you cited as the body which allegedly discussed it did neither join the mailing list discussion,

nor were you willing to hand out their contact info.

It's all public for anyone to see on the mailing list archive:

https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/msg5526...

https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/

  • kstrauser  3 days ago

    WTF. These are some of the first things I clicked through on that page:

    - https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/msg5534...

    - https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/msg5534...

    Gee, I can't imagine how that mailing list could ever be toxic.

    • raffraffraff  3 days ago

      If his definition of woke mind virus is "identitarianism", then it's agree that it's fucking awful. But I wouldn't call it "woke mind virus".

      Identitarianism is a cancer, that has been fed via social media algorithms. We seem to have invented a machine for rewarding all of the wrong incentives. Who would have thought that phenomena like audience capture & polarised thought bubbles would be in the palm of the hand, directing thoughts and forming unbreakable opinions on an array of issues that otherwise wouldn't even be on the radar?

      I don't think that this is a left, right or in between thing. Identitarianism had infected the entire political spectrum.

      BTW: Perhaps I'm wrong but I don't take the Wikipedia definition of "identitarian movement" and identitarianism. I'm thinking entirely about identity politics. "If you're associated with person X you must be Y", or "If you believe A you must be a B". Highly policed thought bubbles. Ostracism. Cancelling.

      As a result, today, with technology that can enable mass communication of thought, there are important conversations that can no longer happen in society.

      10 replies →

    • FergusArgyll  20 hours ago

      So that's what this is about! I wish instead of dancing around the issues and coming up with reasons to hate the project, ppl would just say "I don't like his politics" and he can say "I don't like yours either" and then any new readers will instantly get it

  • ArneBab  2 days ago

    There was no public debate, but he did start to talk to devs 18 months before, and the devs told him quite clearly that they strongly object to repurposing the name.

    And that repurposing the name would cause lots of damage.

  • sanity  3 days ago

    > There was no "year of debate".

    Incorrect, I raised the issue with the lead maintainer over a year prior to that announcement.

    > You came to the mailing list and declared it as a finalized decision.

    As the project's architect I'm entitled to make decisions about the project's future direction.

    > It's all public for anyone to see on the mailing list archive:

    > https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/msg5526...

    I stand by every word I said in that mailing list thread.

  • DANmode  2 days ago

    A correction, based on the text as written:

    they were saying they debated with themselves,

    before making the decision.

dminik  3 days ago

> This is a false narrative, from the Freenet FAQ[1]:

I'm sorry, but nothing following that even comes close to proving that it's a false narrative. Quite the opposite actually.

  • thih9  3 days ago

    To be fair, I see some goodwill, e.g.:

    > To ease the transition the old freenetproject.org domain was redirected to hyphanet’s website, while the recently acquired freenet.org domain was used for the new architecture.

    So in that aspect it seems more user friendly than a hard fork.