Criticism of Freenet
Apart from the Controversy
regarding the content on Freenet, there has also been criticism on the handling of the Freenet project. Most notably, this is the case for the development process as well as for human resource management, which has lead to countless delays and, according to some criticasters, poor development decisions. The endresult, at least in the view of the criticasters, being a poorly working program, which takes days to integrate into the network, and even then only works slowly and is unable to retrieve many freesites.
While one could argue that is due to the novelty of the concept, this can only be partly the cause, since, after all, it has been worked on for 5 years by now. And a poor effort in pooling human resources, especially of the part of the founder, has little to do with the novelty. Bad decisions, according to the criticism, involve areas of financial transparancy, refusal of implementing user-friendly tools (like a client-sided searchengine), the neglect of creating updatable persistent keys, the poor handling of interested parties (especially if they are non-coders) who want to help with the project, the refusal to adopt parts of other anonymous networks, code, or layers (such like that of i2p), the decision to go for (and to stick with) a poorly performing routing-mechanism in the 0.5 version (NGR), the decision in the latest version to go for a darknet (and the privacy and load-balancing consequences), etc.
Some also have a criticism towards the used programming language (Java) because of the fact it is not a real FOSS language (Suns' Java), or because Java has the reputation to slow down the computer.