[booby]

Originally Posted by JackSpratts

almost, but i'd like a clarification. i'm interested in your system architecture as it applies to users. do you maintain control over initial subscriber connectivity? must users first pass through your servers for a handshake or a list of available ip's or a content inventory or keys (or anything, i’m writing this quickly) before going into full p2p mode (like Soulseek for instance), or is it a totally decentralized and unregulated pure peer-to-peer system, from beginning to end, like Waste?

can you cancel individual access or control the users in any way? your website seems to indicate that you can. if so, why would you?

what i’m concerned about is still another weak p2p network-with-pretty-features that's unable to withstand hostile legal actions, siphoning off users from robustly secure networks that can hold their own. the community is painfully familiar with file-sharing societies ruined by legal fiat like grokster or dysfunctional internal dynamics like morpheus. we’ve seen too many communities brought down by architecture geared more to profits than user protection.

there are many p2p systems and regardless of bells and whistles most are as good as the next, so truly new ideas are essential. client creativity and system creators should be celebrated, but since there are so few systems strong enough to stand on their own, and to stand up to hostile actions by copyright cartels and judicial writs, it becomes essential we encourage the more robust of them, for the benefit of all users, and not just the financial investors.

that about sums it up.

- js.

hi, 100% agree