Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I agree with him, but he doesn't seem to understand how Opera's proxies are intended to work -- they don't want to have to tunnel all your traffic except as a last resort: their main purpose is as a backchannel for coordinating NAT hole-punching.

As dumb as Opera is, they're not stupid enough to pay for all your live filesharing bandwidth, symmetrically.



Actually, I do understand that. That's why I said that they were using a "P2P-like" network... Given that it's an alpha, it's pretty awesome that it works as it does, but this deficiency — tying you to an "operaunite.com" domain — is primarily where my criticism lies.

And, that they used such confusing and contradictory terms in their EULA.


Still, the claim in the next sentence that "you must push all your traffic through Opera’s proxy service" isn't true.

I understand that you were primarily criticizing/debunking the reason d'etre and social crap in the copypastad press-release -- not the technical handwaving.


How are you prevented from buying your own domain and using it for your Unite services?

What is your proposed solution?

AllPeers required an AllPeers client on both ends, right? But then you undermine the whole Unite concept, don't you?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: