I don't know if this is the correct place to ask this...
 

I have been a WinMX user for a couple of years now. True WinMX is flying under the radar right now but with the RIAA systematic attack on file sharing it is only a matter of time before it becomes one of their targets.

Having said that I would like to ask your opinions as P2P users about features you would like to see in a P2P application. My reasoning behind this is because I am a developer and I am in the process of creating a new P2P application that is fully decentralized, scalable, anonymous, and secure. I am about 50% of the way to creating a usable client and it's time to start thinking about feature sets.

Questions:

1.) What is important to you in a P2P application? This could be any feature that you are currently using or have used. Such concrete things as chat, built in media organizers, built in media players, multi-source downloading, autoresume downloading, but can also include more subjective things such as better search results, d/l speed etc. Could you please prioritize your responses. I am a sole developer and I am trying to prioritize my development efforts. The reason why I worded this question this way will become clear in #3.

2.) How important is cross platform capabilities to you?

3.) What are the dream features that you would like to see. Let your mind run here. If you could build the perfect P2P client, what features not included in question #1 would it have?

4.) I think that this question will receive the most push back since I am asking this on a forum whos users use a free P2P application. I have a full time job that pays my bills and keeps a roof over my head but because of that I can't spend the amount of time in the development of this application as I would like or it deserves. I would love to work on it full time. What, do you feel, people could stomach paying for such and application? And what do you feel it would take for you to pay for such and application?

5.) Considering question #4 response, would there be any developers that would be interested in helping in the endeavor or creating the next generation P2P file sharing app?

Thanks for taking the time to read and respond to my questions.

John

1.

Search Results, Speed, Resumable downloads...auto or not, to hell with organizers and built in players...they just bloat the prog and everyone knows winamp is the best anyway. Multi Source is ok, as long as you have a way to check the files...when you have lots of sources, 1 bad file will screw up your download.

2.

Cross platform...you mean for mac, linux, or for the different windows platforms? All windows platforms are a must!! Mac and linux should come as the prog gets more popular.

3.

Something streamlined and simple. There is no need for all kinds of extras, if its simple and works, it will likely become very popular. A folder browser would be nice, and easy to do...just make a tab or whatever and have it point to the location on the drive so you can see your files. Being a musician, i feel that there should be a way for unsigned artists to promote their music with the prog...even if it is just a pic, a tracklist, a description, and a link to the bands webpage. Underground / Unsigned bands in general are ALWAYS looking for new ways to promote themselves...i feel this would be a big step in the right direction.

4.

Free...if you want to charge for it, people will still use the free progs no matter what hassels there are....you cant compete with free....If i was going to pay for a program (which is more rare than a blue moom) it would have to have anything and everything...old, new...country to hip hop...no missing tracks, no missing albums, catolouged, tagged, album covers, track lists, descriptions, high quality rips...along with lower quality rips for slower connections, multiple formats, (mp3, FLAC, ogg, etc) , codecs for the different formats, and most importantly...the downloads would have to NEVER bottom out...if i have a 3Mbit connection, and its all available to use, i expect to get blazing speed. Basicly, it should be your 1 stop shop for all your music needs...

5.

Im not a developer, so i cant help you there.

GutrGuy,
Thanks for responding. I agreee with the points you made but wanted to clarify a few things.

What do you see as the best way of verifing files for multisource d/l's? Do you envision this to be automatic process or go by somesort of hashkey as others have done? I agree with the statement about bloat as well. Do one thing and do it well.

By cross platform I mean mac and 'nix. It is being developed in such a manner that you can stick different guis on it in different platforms with all the functionality being provided by a dll.

A folder browser is a very simple matter to do. What I find more interesting is your comment about artist promoting their own music. Could you expand on this thought. What do you envision here? I think you may be onto something. Also for the independant/underground artists do you see this as a distribution mechanisim in which they can charge for their works or just provide them for free? My grey matter is bubbling on this one but it hasn't formed a good cohesive understanding of all that could/should be done.


The problem with developing something like this is that people's intellectual pumps have been primed to expect free applications. This is great as a user, as a developer it sucks because it means I have to hold down two jobs in order to develop something that I want to develop. One to pay the bills and one to satisfy my intellect. Your answer to question three got me to thinking that maybe there is something that could be done helping unsigned/underground artist to get their music out to the public and receive some sort of monetary stream from their works as well as me getting something for mine. Just a thought. Don't flame me on this... Just kickin' cobwebs.

Not a problem. I do really appreciate your feedback though.

Be good or be good at it,

John

ill get back with ya...gotta go to band practice, then to work...so likely sometime tomorrow....

Many people don't seem to realise the time, effort and cost it requires to create such works. Whether it be music, software or an oil painting, etc... It can be very difficult to accolplish while working a full time job. Just think of all the great works of art that would never have existed if the artists in question did not have the time to invest fully in their creation. They can only do this if they are also being supported by their art. The great painters and composers througout history did their best works on commision.

I know that recording equipment and studio time are very costly. So is touring. Many bands take a loss on tours, but do it anyway to promote CD sales. Imagine if Led Zeppelin had stopped after their first album because they had no revenue comming in, and no way to afford further recording? No Whole Lotta love. No Stairway to Heaven. These classics were inspired by, and recorded because of money. If they weren't getting paid, they wouldn't have done it.

I think people are willing to pay a reasonable price for reasonable quality. It's just the exorbitant price the RIAA charges for mostly crap that has people up in arms. But when people spend their time and money creating something, they deserve something for it. And if people enjoy and appreciate the work of others, they should be willing to show them by helping them out.

Welcome shepdog :beer:

Top of my head...



· Searches should be wide, deep and scalable. i.e., if you’re looking for Metalica and other common fare “simple search” is OK but for obscurities a more powerful engine must be employed with default to simple so network traffic stays minimal.

· Multi source downloading/swarming.

· Decentralized, encrypted social functions, i.e. Chat, Rooms, VOIP etc.

· Some sort of decentralized plugin BBS for users spending more time on the system. Usually the ones with the most inventory spend the most time on the network. Catering to their needs can have the effect of improving the entire community. A local BBS could end up becoming your P2P killer app. Think of how much time people already spend at their favorite boards. Getting any of that means huge numbers.

· File back-ups are essential but something no P2P client addresses. Including it would make yours stand out. To that end seeing “1 click” back-ups from inside the download folder, multi-disc roll-over (automatically span the data across multiple discs) auto-name of disc and html generation of disc filenames/folder for archiving would all be plusses. If you’d like details I can show you programs that include some of these features.

· IP masking: essential atm.

As for money – I’d pay for a client but never for a subscription. Perhaps it’s a matter of perception but to me money for a client rewards the client creator and that's fine, whereas a monthly subscription seems to pay for content - ultimately ripping off artists, and that's unacceptable.

- js.

There's always the possibility of starting an open source project. Let others share the work load while you supervise. The program would still be yours but you wouldn't have to devote all your time doing what others could do for you. Even then there are still advertizing opportunities (as long as you don't use adware or spyware).

That's a curious statement. How can "paying for content" be presumed to be "ripping off artists" without understanding how revenues will be dispursed in that particular business model?

"Paying for content" suggests royalties. But who gets the royalties? Well, that depends on who owns the rights to the music. Any artist who is signed to a major label - the label most likely owns the rights, and therefore would receive the lion's share of the royalties. The artist in this case is being ripped off, but they are being ripped off by the label for whom they signed a contract... not the purchasers of the content.

Many bands are either independant or own their own rights even though they are signed to a major label. Some big name artists own their own label. In these cases, the artists would receive all the royalties due from the purchase of their music. This would hardly be "ripping off the artist."

the "paying for content" p2p models in existence so far don’t include any revenue for either artists labels or songwriters. the revenue seems to exist solely for the benefit of the system operator. soulseek is one system that famously comes to mind. the web is filled with many others, even cases where vendors are charging for systems they don't own or contribute to, in effect a double rip-off of artists and the p2p community.

getting something for free is just that, an insignificance, and with all the studies done so far no correlation has been established that conclusively proves free content reduces sales, studies they’ve had plenty of time to make. file sharing’s been going on for the better part of a decade. generations if you include home taping. several well respected studies go so far as to show a benefit to sales, with increases noted in certain circumstances. while where you stand on the issue has a lot to do with where your bread is buttered it's hard for anyone to tie an effect to sales one way or the other in a purely objective fashion.

purchasing content is an entirely different matter. with each entertainment dollar spent one is removed from the general pool, leaving less for creators and producers.

so if the pay model is the same one we’ve been seeing for years yeah it’s a rip-off of the creative community. if we’re looking at a new model that's great - but it’s news to me and to hollywood. for as long as p2ps've existed file sharing companies have tried to broker an arrangement but the riaa/mpaa has not allowed anything like revenue sharing to date and they have indicated no intention of allowing it anytime soon. besides competition if there’s anything they fear more than p2p i haven’t heard of it so i don’t see them doing anything except continuing their attempts to kill it. stupid yes and counterproductive definitely but there you go. it’s their loss.

- js.

My understanding is that shepdog is interested in a method of compensating the artists themselfs in a reasonable way. This would certainly be a good idea... but how to impliment it?

Nah it seems more like he's looking for ways to compensate his own work on the program, allowing him to spend less time at his square job and more time coding. In that case Jack's suggestion makes more sense, a one time fee, no limited subscriptions.
Shep, the price you charge, if you choose to do so, will depend on the program's popularity, and thus the amount of content that's available. To do that you want to keep the price very low to attract the largest number of people. There are some who won't pay anything, and there are some who would pay up to $15 or maybe even $20. I'd suggest keeping the price below $5, perhaps as low as $.99. Ship the program with a shareware licence, a 15 day free trial with full program functionality, at the end of which registration would be required, and hook your users that way. If your network builds a reputation for high quality files, short queues, and a lot of variety then you'll attract every kind of p2p user, even the ones reluctant to pay for it will eventually join in. One dollar may seem kinda low, but imagine if five or ten thousand people joined your network...

Suggestions...
 

1. Keep it simple and bloat free.
2. Very important to me, but if it's binary only and I have to use WINE in order to run it I'm not that interested.
3. Group and community features in a decentralised environment. This includes publishing/broadcasting features as in AudioGalaxy. Permanent identities (public keys) linked to rewards and improved social standing. The ability to use any web browser to browse through verified hash links hosted on the p2p network itself would be nice. :ND:
4. I probably wouldn't pay more than $10. I think anything more than that will have a negative psychological effect on almost anyone. $10 is also a reasonable price for foreigners, such as myself, to accept. However, I'm biased so if it's not free, as in libre, I won't pay for it. :D Asking for donations would work for me but I don't know how others would feel about it.
5. :ND: Don't PM me about it though.

{P.S. do a search for TankGirl's posts on this forum, particularly her one on permanent identities and the Ultimate Grid. ;) }

Okay, where to start
 

Sorry guys,
I went out white water kayaking this weekend so I've haven't had a chance to respond. Got my ass kicked my a nasty hole, but that's another story. ;)
I'll try to answer everyones questions in the following post.

Thanks Jack


The new protocol I am developing will have sophisticated searchs. The ability to search on ID3V1 and V2 tags, some data matching of the actual content of the file. What I mean by this is that I've seen MP3's tagged totally differently but the conent of the file be exactly the same. Same bit rate, same length, same content. A lot of applications fail to recognize these as the same files. I want to. I also want to take this a step further as well. You might have a file that is sampled at a given rate and you want to finish d/l the file. I want to see what I can do about re-encoding on the fly to desired bitrate. What sort of advanced search features are you speaking of? I am wide open to suggestions. I also agree that the protocol must do everything it can to keep network traffic to a minimum. I am doing this. Most of the control packets being sent around the network are well less than 100 bytes. 75% are less than 50 bytes.


That is manditory in my current design. I am even trying to build in the ability to d/l peices of the same file from different souces as you see some other clients do. But I also am trying to give the user the ability to listen to these fragments as they are d/l'ed so they can identify if the song is in fact the one they want. I don't know of any other p2p that does that. It will also support manual/autoresuming.


Decentralization:
The network is completely decentralized already. Well not 100% accurate right now but it will be so soon. The only portion that isn't decentralized is when registering with the network. The peer discovery servers as I have them set up now are not housed by a central server instead the functionality is provided by other peers with faster connections and more horsepower on their system. This is going to be replaced by a three pronged discovery system imploying IP Multicasting, UDP, and the already existant Peer Discovery servers. Multicast is a very powerful technology but a lot of people can't use Multicast so it will fall back to UDP. If UDP doesn't work it will fall back to contacting a Peer Discovery server.

Encryption:
The network as I have it designed is a completly anon and secure network. I also want the users to be able to use any encryption scheme they want. It will come with a default encryption algo, probably twofish, but you will have the ability to use anything you want, even custom developed routines. You will also have the ability to say what type of functionality you want encrypted, chats, searches, file listings, d/l's, etc. This will allow you to optimize the speed of the system. If you are finding that you searches are taking a while because of the encryption algo you are using, you will have the choice of changing the algo used or not using one at all. Also with the ability to specify encryption you can set up your own network of only those people that have the encryption engine that you are using. So if you want to specify something other than the standard encryption say a symetric type encryption that doesn't use public/private key pairs but instead uses a single key, you could set the system up to use it and pass that encryption/decryption 'plugin' out to your friends along with the key and have a private network. You would be able to choose if you wanted to process the network packets encrypted with the standard encryption or only those with the custom algo so you could really have a private peer network of only the people you wanted. At least this is one of themany possibilities on how it could be used.

Chat Rooms:
I am looking for suggestions in this area and I am also trying to build a flexible design here so that myself or third party developers can build custom functionality, such as chat, that can run on top of the P2P network protocol.


See my comment about Chats in the above answer. I definetly agree that regular users need features that will make their experience in such an app more compelling. I am looking at several different BBS/Chat type functionalities. Things such as IRC, MSN-like, as well as the typical forum type functionality. Could you expand on what you were thinking or point me to some examples of what you were thinking? It would be appreciated.


Good suggestion. I had not thought about this possibility. Very good idea and I would appreciate you pointing out the apps you were talking about.


Jack, the way the system is designed it's first driving factor is anonymity. The 'only' way that someone could forsure pin a user down would be to 'surround' it with systems they owned. This would not be possible because the network organizes the way clients are connected without the ability of users to influence that organization. If you want more info on how the network is designed to make the above statement clear, feel free to contact me.


I am thinking of several different things here. I am 'NOT' looking to make just another P2P application. I am looking to make something not totally different in functionality than the current crop but with a much broader reach. I would like to avoid someone paying for the application either in a subscription or a one time pay if I could. Looking back at the comments made before I really see a need for something totally outside of the current box of thinking. I would like to figure out a new type of tool that can be used to help independant/underground/unsigned artist to take the control of the distribution and promotion of their music into their own hands and out of the hands of the recording industry. The current state of affairs for both artists and consumers is mainly a result of the recording industies actions. It's time for a change and for the middle man to quit taking the majority of the profit revenue. I also want to see the consumer given the opportunity to make his voice heard when it comes to what type of music they prefer instead of leaving that control in the recording industries hands such as it is today. Today they control this by signing who 'they' think the consumers will like. The consumer's only voice is only heard after the recording industry has given an artist their blessing by a signed contract. I don't want to rip off artist, I want to give them the ability to take their career into their hands. I'd like to hear everyones comments on this.


Mazer due to the types of license used in OpenSource such as the GPL, MIT and several others it would make basing a company based around it very difficult. I can see several of the configurable modules of the app being open sourced but not the entire thing.


You are correct. See the comment above. I would like to hear everyones ideas about this.


Mazer, I am looking for a way in which the artists involved can control their destiny in how they market and distribute and the consumer can have a voice in who is the most deserving of the content creators of their money.


I was actually thinking of ways to the users not to have to pay for the application outright or a subscription. I can see the possibility of others developing things that they feel they want to charge for, more power too them if the users or content providers are willing to pay for it, great. But I would like to have it so that if you just wanted to a workable system you would have one provided by the base functionality.


Dave, see post above. I want to keep the base protocol and application as simple as possible but provide an architecture in which you can add functionality.


No you will not have to use wine. The UI will be seperated from the networking code so a UI for whatever OS you may want to run it on can be provided. Even several ui's for the same os if someone wants to develop their own.


Permanant Identities. I have been thinking on how to do this for a while and I think that I have it figured out.


I totally agree. The pain threshold for payment on such a system is very low. See my comments above about the direction I would like to take. What do you think?


I'm not much on PM'ing. Don't worry, it won't happen. I would like for this discussion to be in an open environment, because you guys will be the users and will benifit from that conversation.


Thanks, I'm looking it up now.

Hey, I like your attitude and I'm excited about the project. Does it have a name yet?

Oh come on Mazer ...can't you do better than that? lol ...I always depend on your deep intelligence to make me look good. ...cause you know damn well they confuse us sometime. We make a good team ...you be Eienstein ...and I'll be Marilyn ....ps: if you noticed any spelling errors in the above...go fuck yourself.

That was kinda crass ...I apologise. :)

Pfft, spelling errors? Who cares?

Not everyone here is familiar with you yet, we've had some new people join since you've been gone. Try not to make me look bad. ;) JK

should be........


and no i wont .....no fun by yourself....well it is but not as much fun

Mazer, uhmm, Maze.....
 

Thanks for your encouragement. I am very excited about the possibilities as well. To such an extent I have to be careful at work because I find myself thinking about it all the time.

As for the name, right now my wife is calling it my white whale (:hah: Hey don't even go there. :no: lol). I haven't picked a name for it yet but the networking concepts used by the app is based upon the thesis of Sean Blanchfield from Dublin University in which he called the concept 'Lattice'. As a matter of fact there is an open source project named 'The Lattice' that hasn't went anywhere that is also based upon the thesis. I don't like that name and wouldn't want to step on Sean's toes so I am looking for another name. The reason why the name is 'Lattice' is because that is how the network is organized. In a lattice like fashion. I am always open to suggestions for the name, but I will have something before it is released. As for the Maze -> Mazer convertation I don't know what to say except, okay. :)

Thanks to everyone for all their input. The ball is rolling and we are going to have new P2P application by the end of the year, at least a first cut of one.

John

Actually it could be either way.

And welcome to the forum :)

Edit: Ooops.... didn't see it was Helly pointing out the spelling; I thought it was the thread starter and I was being sarcastic to the newbie. Sorry Helly, didn't mean to welcome you to the forum again. :p

This is a common misconception. Microsoft legally ripped a lot of code from the BSDs without paying or distributing source code. You might want to consider the BSD license yourself. Basically it allows you to do whatever you want with the code, as long as you give credit where credit is due.

From Selling Free Software:
The GPL is not as restrictive as all the FUD-mongers and MS Fanboys would like you to believe. ;)

I screwed up my welcome post shepdog. Hi anyway. :WW:

Hi and welcome to P2P-Zone, shepdog! It is always a pleasure to see new developers joining the p2p movement! :beer:

As for the title of your thread, you have come to just the right place to ask your questions :BL: – this is an active and savvy p2p community with plenty of collective experience and insight.

Some comments on the discussion so far:

Hashing is the obvious solution here. Hash trees are definitely worth considering as they allow you to verify files in small chunks, and the verification does not depend on the order in which the chunks are received. The latter property becomes important in multisourced environment where you may request things in a certain order but receive them in a totally different order.

This might not be a very good idea. Mixing higher quality rips to lower quality rips on the fly will just gradually degrade the average quality of the content pool and make it harder to spot original high quality releases apart from their more or less degraded versions. It is much better to try to distribute high quality releases as such, untouched, and thereby maximize the number of peers having them in the multisourced environment. If a lower quality version is needed for some reason, it should be distributed similarly untouched, so that the peers having it could form another large set of sources for downloaders.

I think Filetopia has used a similar approach but for an average user such a choice is needless and technically very challenging. Few WASTE users know (or care to know) which particular encryption method is being used in the software – for them it is important to know that the method chosen by the developer is 1) secure and 2) efficient enough to do the job. It is a good idea to test different encryption methods and compare their efficiency, but maybe this testing should be done by the beta testers, and at the end you would just pick the one that both you and your beta test team considers to be the best choice.

It would also be good for the end user if various optimisations (for speed, for search success etc.) would be as automatic as possible. If there is a set of parameters to be optimised for me to get my stuff faster, I would like the smart software to do the optimising in the background and just deliver me the goodies with the best speed possible from the network! :BGA:

Here is an interesting earlier discussion on permanent identities and related stuff like trust relations. Many important points and technical details are covered in the discussion so it is worth checking for a developer. As Dave points out, permanent and verifiable identities are needed to build any sort of sustained peer relations and social structures. When you have permanent, cryptographically strong identities, you can start building 1-to-1 trust relations, trusted groups and trusted distribution networks on them. Artists and other sources of new content need permanent identities even more than average users to be able to establish a reliable and genuine presence on the network.

- tg :WA:

:o Now be quiet, you're scaring people, Maze.
Don't mind Maze, he's been having a minor identity crisis since I joined the old Nappy forum in '00. :cr:

I think Dave's right here. Just look at RedHat, they make the most widely recognized and used Linux distribution available and they're profitable too. Of course to make an open source project generate revenue you need a brilliant business person to match your brilliant programming skills. But if what you're really trying to do is to promote and support emerging musicians, filmmakers, and artists then there's no need for the revenue stream to go through your hands, users can compensate artists directly. Your software could include a PayPal link to each artist or something like that. The point is that capitalism and open software aren't necessarily opposing forces, and sometimes they're quite complimentary.

This doesn't have to be the case if Ogg Vorbis files are used. It supports a feature called peeling: basically you encode a high bitrate file once and any lower bitrate file can then be peeled out of it without causing transcoding artifacts. Ogg also has a very flexible tagging system, and if the content creator so chose he could include information in the tag that pointed to the source of the original file along with its hash. This way if a user came across a low bitrate file and decided he wanted the high quality version he could easily find the right file to download. These are minor points in a world dominated by MP3, but if the p2p client supported Ogg peeling and Ogg tag searching then it would give artists that much more control over the way their art gets distributed.

Thanks TG (can I call you TG? lol). The p2p space is such an interesting problem domain and is one that I feel is the most wide open when it comes to oportunities for new development. I've been drawn to it like a moth to a flame.

This is becoming more and more apparent the longer this thread gets and the more I delve into earlier posts. You've had some especially thought provoking threads.

Wow, what a great abstract. This is just what I was searching for. Thank you.


I understand what you are saying about the degradation of quality from re-encoding. My motivation behind this was to provide more resources for slower connections to d/l files from. If they only want to d/l at 128bps and all that is available is 320bps or a vbr I could see the possibility of d/l at a lower rate. So you see 15 sources for a vbr or 320bps file but it would take you 4 hours to d/l it would be nice to have the ability to right click on the source and have it d/l at a desired bitrate. Of course these re-encoded files could be cached and tagged to point back to the original.

I totally agree that simplicity is the best approach for the average user, but for power users and all the tinkers it would be nice to give them the ability adjust settings. From the programming API's perspective this will be easily controlled, maybe just not from the user interface.?

Totally agree here as well. The system will try to optimize all the time, and learn better optimizations over time. Read between the lines there.



I totally agree with your assessment. When it comes to community you would like to be able to have permanent identities based upon a hash and have a form of 'dns' for lack of a better term to be able to locate and communicate with the given identity if online. In looking at giving tools to the content providers to set up channels to allow them to offer their content as well as allowing users to reward content providers with money a thought occured to me. It would be nice for a content provider to be able to identify the user that gave money and to target that user in the future because they donated in the past. The problem with this is that if I can tie say a paypal account to a hash for this purpose it would negate the anonymous aspect of the single hash used as identity. Because if that use ever provided a file encrypted with that hash I could tie it right back to them. I was thinking of a way around this by providing a Identity public key that the user would be known by, but also the user would have a public encryption key that would be used for all encryption related transmissions to/from the user. This would allow a seperation between the public identity of user and allow them to contriibute to things they think is worthwhile and to be rewarded by that content provider as well as remain anon when they don't want to contribute to a content provider but still want to snag content. Just a thought I was kicking around in my head on the way into work this morning. Like I said earlier, I have a hard time thinking about anything else. ;)

Thanks for your feedback and your previous postings. Very good information.

One last question to the board in general. Do any of you think you would be interested in beta testing a new p2p app around the end of the year? I've got to start thinking about it..

Thanks to all of you for all your feedback.

John

Right. There is no problem with peers having multiple identities for different purposes. In your case, as the low level network topology is a lattice, you might want to use temporary disposable identities for the nodes in their role as lattice members. These would be purely technical identities without history, merits or credits - just to allow the peers to run protected sessions with each other and to refer to each other (in peer discovery, lattice reconfiguration etc) in a reliable way. In other, more social roles the peers could use more permanent identities with a history and associated merits and credits.

Instead of having a single permanent identity for all your social interactions it might be safer to have a set of permanent identities, one for each established social relation (peer contact, group membership etc). This way, if any of those identities would get lost, compromised or troubled, you would not lose your entire social position and credentials but just the compromised part of it. This sort of arrangement would also help to make the peer discovery process more secure: when searching for a given peer you would search for an identity that would be unknown or irrelevant to most other peers.

- tg :WA:

I think I can speak for everyone when I say you have dozens of eager participants ready and waiting for your prototype. Your in the p2p zone now.

Your post has been assimilated...:borg: :tu: Don't give away too many trade secrets. :BGA: