Slashdot Mirror
Creating a Backboneless Internet?
Peter Trepan asks: "The Internet is the best thing to happen to the free exchange of ideas since... well... maybe ever. But it can also be used as a tool for media control and universal surveillance, perhaps turning that benefit into a liability. Imagine, for instance, if Senator McCarthy had been able to steam open every letter in the United States. In the age of ubiquitous e-mail and filtering software, budding McCarthys are able and willing to do so. I Am Not A Network Professional, but it seems like all this potential for abuse depends upon bottlenecks at the level of ISPs and backbone providers. Is it possible to create an internet that relies instead on peer-to-peer connectivity? How would the hardware work? How would the information be passed? What would be the incentive for average people to buy into it if it meant they'd have to host someone else's packets on their hard drive? In short, what would have to be done to ensure that at least one internet remains completely free, anonymous, and democratized?"
http://anonetnfo.brinkster.net -- The internet the way it was meant to be. Check it out, you may be surprised.
403 Forbidden?
If that's the Internet was meant to be, sign me up!
We seem to be scaling rather nicely.
It's an excellent scalability mechanism -- everyone gets turned away. Bravo, sir.
(I'm sure there's just something wrong with the server right now, but between the topic and this post, I couldn't resist some gentle joshing.)
The Freelance Wizard
"Why not leverage nearly ubiquitous wireless access points (and possibly ad hoc wireless card settings) to create a completely wireless mesh that doesn't even connect to the Internet at all?"
Because it's slow unreliable and unmanageable. Only a local govt. would be stupid enough to waste money on such an idea.
Vote for Pedro
You totally missed the point. What's worse, is that you don't realize it. And what's much worse, is that you aren't capable of realizing it.