GNUnet 0.10.0 released
gnunet.org
gnunet.org
I guess they DO see themselves as a "framework", but there is a GTK UI and there is a "regular" filesharing component to it
Consider making a donation towards binaries, perhaps of build servers or Windows licenses so that this can be done. GNU projects are funded by the FSF, so a donation to the FSF along with a request for binaries carries a lot of weight.
Of course, the most weight is carried by a code contribution. Help GNUnet make those binaries!
If anything, GNU FM and GNU social will work better together.
anything to do with recent RSA news?
(It is good that they are moving away from RSA; new systems should stop using RSA.)
Despite the unease certain people (like Schneier) have with ECC in general (it is more advanced math and fewer people understand it well), and NIST curves in particular (did NSA choose weak classes of curves?)-- based on public knowledge, there are advances in factoring and the discrete log problem, while there's no similar progress against ECDLP.
If NSA knew some attack against ECC or weakness in p256, p384, p521 curves (i.e. anything which doesn't apply to RSA), that would mean they sabotaged the security of Secret and TS information that's allowed to be transmitted using NIST suite B, which uses ECC and specifically those curves. Military comms between NATO allies might also be using Suite B.
Is it possible that NSA has gone completely off the rails, only cares about the security of their own ECI (which I think tends to use their Suite A algorithms)? Are they willing to throw all other cryptography users, including NATO military comms users and other parts of the US Government, under a bus in pursuit of their ability to weaken generally used encryption? Perhaps, but I think it's unlikely. Speaking of which, does GCHQ use Suite A algorithms, or Suite B (including standard ECC and NIST curves), or something else? And the rest of the Five Eyes? That's something that unreleased Snowden documents probably speak to.
GNU Foo is, branding-wise, just like Microsoft Word, Google Drive, or Apple Macintosh.
"Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them." - http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
If you feel that a license that says "Full permission, so long you do not restrict other users of the program" as more about control and less about sharing, then keep that to you self. There is nothing genuinely new about in such discussion, and frankly, it just tiresome to read, comment and down vote. Note that the down vote is not because I 100% completely disagree with your comment, but because your comment will just cause a rehash of an flame war which is old enough to start investing in its own pension plan.
If that aint an old flamewar statement, I don't know what is. Everybody here knows what the alternative is (BSD, and BSD-like licenses). We weren't born yesterday and we're nerdy enough to know what is being argued for.