Slashdot Mirror
Internet Is Easy Prey For Governments
Hugh Pickens writes writes "Douglas Rushkoff writes on CNN that the revolution in Egypt starkly reveals the limits of our internet tools and the ease with which those holding power can take them away. 'Old media, such as terrestrial radio and television, were as distributed as the thousands of stations and antennae from which broadcast signals emanated, but all internet traffic must pass through government and corporate-owned choke points,' says Rushkoff adding that when push came to shove over WikiLeaks in the US the very same government authority was used to cut off "enemies of the state" from access and funding. Rushkoff suggests that we use the lessons of the internet to build a communications infrastructure that cannot be controlled from the top. Back before the internet, many early computer hobbyists networked on Fidonet, a simple peer-to-peer network and now digital activists propose reviving such ideas with mesh networking over Wi-Fi networks that could connect inhabitants of an entire city without anyone having an internet service provider. 'Until we choose to develop such alternative networks, our insistence on seeing the likes of Facebook and Twitter as the path toward freedom for all people will only serve to increase our dependence on corporations and government for the right to assemble and communicate.'"
Amusing story coming right above one lauding the benefits of U.S. government regulation over the internet.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Shortwave radio is unstoppable.
Not impossible, sure, but there are a lot more ISPs and broadband providers in the US.
...profit?
I'm pretty sure you can connect a computer to a radio broadcaster as well as anything else.
And that's not even touching a satellite connection, which can be with any number of companies and providers, sometimes they can even have nothing to do with your local country.
Note all of this assumes you haven't pissed off the US government. Or your own government. Or Anonymous.
As much as people complain about some government/company having the ability to do 'something', completely decentralized systems are also subject to wide spread abuse that is nearly impossible to stop. Think about the proposed "mesh" networking - you traffic goes through who knows whom's device, your IP address comes from where? Your DNS queries come from who knows where? If I can feed you your IP address and DNS results and your data passes through my network - then I own you. Witness what has happened with even fairly simply systems such as SMTP. The world is inundated with SPAM because the system in inherently decentralized and it is impossible to verify where email is coming from. Put all your network traffic through a decentralized system and no one is going to be happy with the results. You think SPAM is bad? You've not seen anything compared to what would happen if you could not say where your IP/DNS/Traffic is from.
...our insistence on seeing the likes of Facebook and Twitter as the path toward freedom for all people...
Ha ha, he made a funny.
Also treasure trove for spooks, cops and what else have you?
The Internet was actually designed to be distributed ... true story.
It only happens to have a few large choke points because its economically effective to do so.
Believe it or not it is entirely possible for the Internet to be used over terrestrial radio ... in fact ... it can be done by 'amateurs'! In fact ... it already is!
Right now the Internet has these choke points because theres no reason other than FUD not to have it that way. Should the actual need for a more diverse infrastructure arise due to the government going psycho than we'll shift gears and make it go that direction. Yes, it'll suck for a period of time to start with until new links are added, and we'll probably have to lose things that consume massive bandwidth for pleasure like youtube ... but rest assured, porn will make sure we recover promptly.
Its just silly to spend a bunch of money for a bunch of links that aren't needed and all the installation costs that go with it.
The Internet works pretty much exactly like fido net when you use UUCP. The difference is simply how you dial the phone line ... the data is actually STILL traveling over the same fiber and copper as it did when you sent your fidonet mail up to your mail hub and distributed back to other nodes.
As for seeing Facebook and Twitter as a path for 'freedom of the people' ... well that just makes you sound like a freaking idiot. Neither of these sites provide anything that wasn't already done before them on the Internet as well in more traditional methods. Old idea, new theme, new fad ... not a world changer. The only difference is now we're paying attention to someone hundreds of miles away from us that has no bearing on our lives what so ever, instead of the people in our own neighborhoods. Its just a different popularity contest.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1149
Funny, I got the opposite impression, that Egypt failed. It is easy to thwart the government, to work around them.
And only 246 hops to reach Slashdot... response times blow out to 30 seconds instead of sub-second response times. I don't think so...
such as terrestrial radio and television
The ETs take offense to such blatant exclusion. Somebody call the ACLU!
'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
The problem is that even the 'basic' information dissemination sites these days are bandwidth-intensive. Facebook / Twitter - They're unusable on a low-bandwidth connection what with all their imbedded features. Heck, even the 'new' Slashdot is barely usable on my older system.
...so not only do you need new networks, you need 'light' interfaces to those networks, a la Lynx or the WAP browsers we were using on our phones a decade ago.
Just another reason for everyone to support amateur (ham) radio. Most people think ham radio is stuck in the 1960s with Morse code, etc, but the hobby now has several million people who communicate using computer-based digital modes, 24 hours a day. This includes use of TCP/IP over shortwave, VHF, UHF, even through a number of ham radio satellites that are built by hams and dedicated to global communication, free of charge and with absolutely no governmental interference. If the corporate infrastructure goes down, ham radio will be there. It would be nice if more people understood the progressive nature of the hobby!
scary?
I think you could make a case for requiring Mesh network support in all commercial/residential wifi routers. Upon losing their upstream, the routers automatically revert to mesh mode on a VLAN providing connectivity for Civil Defense purposes, emergency management, in case of storms or regional outage.
Yes it would be slow, but since most smartphones have wifi, and would be able to use some messaging services and web access even if only local. (But there would be no reason it would be limited to local if some method were provided for routers at the edge of the failure to join the mesh even when they do have upstream.)
You might be able to push this thru legislation if you sell it as a civil defense item. (Hey, I can dream can't I?)
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I've thought of this a bit from time to time, but there are two issues with wireless mesh networking (on a large scale) that I think will cause problems.
First: routing will be a pain. On a small network, you can have a routing table in each host, which over time learns the shortest rout to a particular destination, but routing tables for a large network would be a pain. How do you know who to send a packet to next?
Second: Even if you solve the routing problem, at some point there are going to be huge bottlenecks. For example, the wireless routers located next to Google's headquarters are going to be vastly overloaded. And before you talk about some kind of caching mechanism, realize that Google likely has multiple OC256 lines, each of which has enough bandwidth to saturate a hundred 802.11n devices (numbers from here, sometimes my math is bad, but the point is, even if you manage to cache 95% of the stuff across the internet, it's still not enough).
I'd like to see mesh network working at a large scale, but these are some real problems that need to be dealt with.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Controlling mass media.
Seize and hold the newspapers, the radio stations and TV stations. That has been the highest priority for every faction coup, revolution or uprising, pro or contra, for the last century. The Internet is just a newer medium but the same principle applies. Today you don't just occupy newsrooms, printshops, broadcast towers and satelite uplinks but NOCs or DSL concentrators too, that's all.
And as for the much talked about "Internet kill switch", that is a red herring which is so dead, it smells rather awful by now. "Physical access trumps everything" and whoever has the power has this access. Network admins are not known for owning, and using, weapons om an effective way.
Nothing to see here, move along citizen.
Define "internet". Is something bigger than just Google, Facebook or Twitter. You can have local internet social sites, cutting/controlling a few external connections don't need to be full outage, as local ISPs and sites could still provide social communication, and by one method or another give access or import "global" news. Those local ISPs or access providers could be taken as choke ponts too, but still they are better than the old BBS systems in the same game. You just need a p2p social networkinging protocol that could work even if your ISP is not connected to the world (not sure if i.e. Diaspora could apply there)
Just because the writer can't imagine a time before tweeting doesn't mean it's Twitter that provides the right. That is a natural right, and in the US it's protected from government interference by the Constitution. That's not to be confused with use of a network of computer networks being a "right," or using a private company's microblogging service to set up a flash mob with the right to assemble. People managed to speak and assemble long before companies, schools, and government agencies started peering their networks.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Back before the internet, many early computer hobbyists networked on Fidonet, a simple peer-to-peer network and now digital activists propose reviving such ideas with mesh networking over Wi-Fi networks that could connect inhabitants of an entire city without anyone having an internet service provider.
Maybe here's where the First World can learn (or relearn) from the Third World about low-cost information transfer. If the goal is simply to "communicate" to the masses, then why go through the hassles of setting up mesh networking? Why not just do what the "pirates" and drug dealers do? A quick exchange of goods in some back alley or, with the proper incentive, even right under the noses of the non-secret police.
I can imagine some activist walking up to such impromptu information kiosk (who could be merely a person standing in a corner) and for a modest fee getting a thumb drive or mini DVD-R of the day's news in glorious cellphone cam and RTF files of the next day's protest schedule. Alternatively, smaller late-breaking bits of information could be done via Bluetooth or similar personal area networks. Multiply by thousands of more discreet exchanges between friends and acquaintances and you have one massive jam-tolerant (if not altogether jam-proof) sneakernet.
The problem here is that we can't trust the government to manage such a critical piece of infrastructure. Technical solutions won't help, let's make the government trustworthy instead.
Québec, of all places, had an interesting experiment with a citizen's jury overseeing election contribution laws: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_citoyen#Au_Canada_.28Qu.C3.A9bec.29
Probably the right idea is to get citizens involved in their government more often and more closely, instead of this every-four-year indirect approach of selecting which Special Interest Group you want in charge for the next four years.
This could be useful: http://upsetgeek.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=63%3Awireless-router-on-laptop&Itemid=78
Here's the thing. The government has the capability to knock out internet access to maybe 95% of the population. However, those 5% are more than capable (and more than likely willing) to set up sneakernets, sat-uplinks, ad-hoc dial-up connections and the like. There is no way to entirely disable the internet without also crippling the army's comms- not to mention more mundane services like police, fire and ambulances.
Sent from my CR-48
Back in the day my dad had on old 286 that booted off a floppy and was interfaced somehow with his CB and/or HAM radio setup. They called it packet radio, and from what I understand it was basically transmitting and receiving data packets over the air (big antennae on top of the house, neighbors loved us) much the same as data packets travel over the Interwebz now. I think we need to revive this technology and update it. Let the Robber Barons and their dogs (politicians) try to shut off millions of independent radio operators. I would ask my dad for details, but he passed away last year. RIP Poppy!
I believe that in this context the group of people who are advocating for things like civilian run mesh networks are not advocating that we *replace* the Internet as we know it today with these networks as so man Slashdotters seem to be assuming. They are not talking about having these systems in place for watching movies on Netflix, or for telling all your friends on facebook that you just farted.
Rather, the point is so that in a state of emergency (i.e., the government has completely lost it's marbles and decided to declare martial law and thereby shutdown all civilian communications) these networks can be used to continue to take advantage of the kind of instant mass communications our society has come to rely on. The point is so that you can still contact your family back on the other coast, or tell your friends you're hosting a meeting to talk about how to handle the national guard unit stationed around your neighborhood for your own "safety", ...etc.
I think really, they just want to be able to send e-mail, and post in online forums.
Personally, I think it's too late. If, for example, the US federal government decides to "go Egypt on our asses", they're going to do it in the next few years, well before we have time to setup any sophisticated civilian run mesh networking. Our only hope is to make sure that such a thing never happens by pressuring our politicians hard, and getting our friends to do the same...
It already supports distributed storage and is quite fast for small (web page-sized) files.
A potential problem where low-activity pages might not be propagated outside of the originating site -- and thus become single-point vulnerable -- could be easily addressed.
(Very viable: Right now I see 23 wi-fi networks, were a few years ago there were only three.)
Low Earth orbit satellites died in the last decade due to being a solution in search of a problem. Allowing Internet access for repressed populations would be a good application for them provided the costs can be kept down.
"Old media, such as terrestrial radio and television, were as distributed as the thousands of stations and antennae from which broadcast signals emanated"
And are at fixed, well known locations, where a couple of guys with guns can easily pay a visit.
You could just fix your government.
Could do a lot worse than cutting Internet access. But if they are just after your mesh network, they could just jam it our cut out electrical power until laptop batteries drain. You can not solve a human problem using only technological measures. Any government powers sufficient to catch and prosecute crooks is also sufficient to abuse ordinary citizens. The only answer is democratic oversight and population educated enough to use it effectively.
The irony is that the early creation of the internet was created by government. It's easy enough to send out a protest movement word for word if you have enough time to prepare but at the same time such a protest may not be backed up by other countries if your own government fought back. The internet allows everyone in the world who's connected to the WWW to know what's going on and people worldwide get to see what each others reaction is. With the internet, all it takes is one rebel to create an army but at the end of the day, it may have been your generation who voted for that government, so it is you to blame as well as the others in your country.
IMHO we are seeing the end of public-display of dissent.
1. Shoe bomber. Effect: Full body scanners.
2. Wikileaks, Effect: Discussion of Internet Kill Switch
3. TPB replacing DNS, Effect: More deep packet inspection
I hope people quit doing things publicly. We all know we can create mischief, but keep it on the down low. Otherwise, it unfortunately just makes life worse.
One thought to ponder.
Filesharing on the Freeway, a mobile Internet
You could slap a pretty front end on UUCP and set up wireless access points for Store and Forward. If two access points are within range of one another, they could transmit data immediately. Otherwise you could either use dialup or a war driver cruising around between access points with a laptop to send data around. It's just a matter of getting enough people to run access points and read the news groups to make it worthwhile most of the time.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
>Rushkoff suggests that we use the lessons of the internet to build a communications infrastructure that cannot be controlled from the top.
Even if they were jammed on a wide scale, a network of inexpensive, self-discovering networks would be damn difficult to control. Relatively easy to monitor, but tough to trace. The hardware is cheap enough, all we need is the reason to start assembling it.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I guess something along the lines of http://www.wafreenet.org/ is what is really being suggested (sorry if I've missed someone else mentioning it). I know a few people part of this network, and aside from the occasional expected segregation, it's rather well run.... Albeit small -Keith
Supposedly the government is selling bandwidth "for the people". If it's our bandwidth then why isn't a large piece of it reserved for the people? Why are public resources reserved for corporations that are out for profit?
Setting up a distributed internet free of government control is solving the wrong problem. If the gov is ignoring the people and acting thugish then the correct response is to fix the government, not the internet. Governments serve us. They were built to serve us, and that's how it should be. It is our duty to check up on the gov and ensure it does its job properly (so I suppose the -real- problem is convincing people to care enough to keep the gov in check).
Netnews, or USENET, has that property. Netnews really does interpret censorship as failure and routes around it.
That remark was originally made about USENET, during an episode in the 1980s when Stanford's IT department tried to censor "rec.humor.funny". Whenever two USENET peers connect, each gets any messages the other doesn't already have. Any messages that are censored across some links will be efficiently restored if there's any uncensored link. Even a low-bandwidth uncensored link is sufficient if the number of censored messages is small.
In the Stanford case, while the main USENET feed was censored, a few departments had machines with dial-up USENET connections. That was enough to automatically circumvent the censorship.
Something length-limited, like SMS messages, over a USENET infrastructure could be useful to have around.
Strange as it may seem, the parent is right - a lot of modern ad-hoc routing algorithms don't automatically keep their routing tables up-to-date -- instead, they flood the nework with a "where is so-and-so" message when they need to send a message to a certain host they don't already know about. As the reply is flooded back from the destination node, every other node learns how to reach it, and the path is built up by the forwarding nodes in the reply, so that when it finally gets back to the initiator, it knows the full path to get to the destination. Data packets are not flooded, only route requests and replies. This is how DSR works. AODV works a little differently but I don't remember the details. By contrast, OLSR is a link-state protocol rather than a distance-vector protocol -- every node tries to keep a current map of the whole network. This is expensive for large networks, but it's reasonably efficient for small ones, like you might see popping up in a disaster area in order to re-establish local communication. The nice thing about OLSR is it runs at the IP layer, so it doesn't have any kind of weird hardware dependency -- it's easy to set up on all kinds of computers (Linux, Windows, WRT54Gs...), or at least that was the state of things a couple years ago when I was using it.
I have used OLSR in small networks of wireless routers (running OpenWRT) and laptops, and it seems to work well. I haven't done any large-scale testing, but some people have.
Well written stuff. My take on it, point-by-point:
"2. DNS" - by Eil (82413) on Sunday February 06, @10:35PM (#35123078) Homepage
This I can only say, I know how to avoid, or use to my advantage by rotating between various public DNS systems such as OpenDNS, ScrubIT, Google, Amazon, etc./et al, & by using HOSTS files for over 300 sites I use, via hardcoding them after ping verifies done over years? I avoid DNS tracking logs. I don't really do it for that added "inviso power" shield though, although, it's a nice "side-effect" (smile) - the real reason I use HOSTS files that way is, is really simple:
I don't waste time looking up what I already have locally in HOSTS & local access/seek, especially after read #1 cached into RAM?
Man - it's just orders of magnitude faster than calling out to a remote machine, where b.s. can be inserted (hint: man-in-the-middle) too, & that's a HUGE weakness... huge.
This part I can pretty much "blow away" & get to all the places I use online... hardcoded, warp speed factor 99++, & foolproof... lol, hey, it works.
In fact, quoting you next, will be my version of it, lol!
"In practice, almost everybody "subscribes" only to the root zone, which is controlled by ICANN." - by Eil (82413) on Sunday February 06, @10:35PM (#35123078) Homepage
In practice, what I do above? The APK zone (which IS controlled by yours truly, & it could be for anyone too really)... but it works vs. that point on DNS , here, @ least.
---
"3. IP address space. IPs are assigned by central authorities, to ISPs, and then to users. All of this is tracked and logged somewhere, so your IP is effectively your signature around the net, even if the IP changes frequently." - by Eil (82413) on Sunday February 06, @10:35PM (#35123078) Homepage
Then, with a good router? Alter your MAC Addy (along w/ IP).
(Also, depending on the mode the router & say your local firewall are talking in (bridged vs. unbridged for example)?? You can do other stuff too... it's pretty amazing!).
That's IF you're into trying to be "The 'GhOsT In ThE MaChiNe", that is.
(Truthfully? You can be, & not only SORT of, but in certain networks or portions?? Sure, you can be, but not to all levels is all, @ least not afaik. I know, for a fact, you can "disappear" your machine on a local LAN though... & it's very easy to do and yet have all access to all network services as well, but you can only REALLY be "as good" there, imo @ least, today's "Invisible Materials/Cloak" articles you see here (was one this week) & it's only true where specific conditions have to be present, etc. & materials too: I mean, really "invisible", truly... Think REAL crystal submerged in alcohol, it's truly, invisible/transparent (fact - but, it too, is a limited condition only & thus my point... hope you caught it if not already know it...)) ... anyhow.
---
"When my web server logs a page view from a given IP address at a given time, there's a very good chance that I could root out the specific human behind that mouse click given enough motivation and/or money and/or influence. Point is, if you can be tracked, you can be censored or otherwise denied access to the network." - by Eil (82413) on Sunday February 06, @10:35PM (#35123078) Homepage
There are sites you can "beat" on that easily though, & yes, truly others you cannot (not without taking a cookie, or running scripts for example - not without the hassle of cookie edits or .pac files that burn scripts), & that's that.
I know so.
Try sears.com for example, iirc. You don't take a cookie, or run script (1 of the 2)?? You're "outtie" (heck, you were NEVER IN, lol! Not unless you want to be trackable as hell, once, & then play around with the things I mentioned above to "play games"... I don't think it's
Anonymous Proxy usage. That also adds to beating website tracking. I am sure most of the folks here know this, but, I don't like omitting detail, so, there you are.
APK
P.S.=> It's an "aid" to trackability limiting being done on a person online also... & I completely neglected noting it (probably because of the speed hits involved, I've toyed with them, but they are TOO slow to utilize imo, thus I omitted them completely)...
Bottom-line feelings here though (this is why I miss FIDONET sometimes, & yes, I was there on BBS systems into it just prior to hitting the net after academia, where a 1mb file was "huge", lol, & it's how I got ahold of DOOM I in fact iirc):
This whole "tracking society" b.s., it really 'gets me down' that it's becoming that way, but I might do the same were I running the show & in fact, I have before on networks & did so to an extent.
However, it turns out that some of the things I do for security and speed, actually bypass a lot of it, which is a great side bonus is all... mainly for speed as my #1 pursuit really, that's because I pay for out of my own pocket (like you do) - I want it all/my money's worth, even if I have to do some work on MY end to make it so, like modding a car I guess... and, of course, for more personal security vs. attack etc./et al - it works... apk
We have completely different legal controls over what government can do and a MUCH larger infrastructure to deal with. Attempting to cut off Internet service in the US would result in entire armies of lawyers descending on every Federal courthouse within range, with Congress equally intent on shutting down the attempt to preserve their own jobs. The US economy (what's left of it) would come to a screeching halt, since even private corporate links frequently travel through the same trunk facilities as user-based traffic. I know the Obama administration is asking for the power to shut down the Internet in an emergency, but the GOP-dominated House of Representatives isn't exactly likely to cooperate with him on the issue...
I can't stand it... I'm going to help plant the seed since its taking too long and I'm busy (and can't see profit which I need more of today than goodwill.)
Facebook is a walled garden. Unlike some other closed companies they will try to interconnect to survive as well as create as much lock in as possible but these APIs and contracts are purely business related and therefore are limited in their scope and adaptability (obviously the choke point is an issue.)
This isn't microsoft, its merely a contact system with idiot proofed 'home pages' and addictive web games. Twitter is in a much better position; but it too is at risk for open or distributed alternatives (think if your email all had to go through hotmail.com how long that would have lasted... but today we are just fine with this??)
An open set of protocols and secure IDs would provide a flexible completely open alternative to the centralized proprietary network. We could develop an application layer social internet to mirror how the internet killed off the private networks and their networking stacks. Facebook might live as a search engine / directory for these IDs like how google helps you find URLs - but it won't be the only place like it is now.
I see something akin to openID but with PGP, GPG keys as well as contact and identification data available; each bit of data being encrypted with different keys. Your ID could float around openly and freely without the associated data and you could search for it among many catalogs and interlinking services -- plus private facebook like services - but you've be able to migrate or incorporate other services without deals between facebook and others. My email can be made public and people can find me but naturally it has spam issues - but I'm not talking about having open contact data with the IDs-- a high school can list student IDs without other data and your app can discover the connections.
Sure there are privacy issues; not much worse than already being dealt with behind closed doors - security by obscurity (that is, obscure because you can't see inside facebook like you can an open system.) Governments likely are building/have social connection linking systems in addition to easy access to cutting edge corporate systems.
The problem with email was spam; its a messaging system not a "permanent" reference like many people's cell phone number has become. This is where I'm not so keen on OpenID either... There are multiple issues each needing some serious thinking and design work-- unique IDs separate from your verified identity - search engines could find the ID over the web and you can find the ones who are the person-- they accept you and you've got a private social network which can securely be formed within that group to share data. I guess I'm for long numeric IDs like phone numbers; we can remember those.... besides you have directories to help find the numbers and if you place that number around with your name enough the connection will be made outside a formal 'networking' system. At least then I can see this John Doe is not that John Doe because their IDs differ (or he changed IDs losing all the benefits.) This lets you stamp things with your ID-- sure it can be faked-- let it! Authentication issues would be separated and optional.
lots of options... john.doe.3546871 for example (ignoring changing names) but not to tie your ID to a 3rd party name like facebook.com, country, etc. duplicates are possible; can't avoid that-- its distributed and open- but since authentication is a side issue it doesn't matter. Your legal full name hasn't been good enough for generations already. Perhaps a simple string format... with recommendations on picking a more unique name (yet another service somebody could provide.)
Multiple RFCs needed. Many creative uses are possible with multiple loosely coupled aspects of such a system. email integration means no facebook email; IM too; games too; authentication systems integration; certificate and domains; dating services; address/ema
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
try this shit in canada see what kinda revolution you start and how fraking fast the "GOVT" aint there next day
Isn't it about time we got the Internet out of the hands of megalomanical dictators, greedy corporations and power-crazed organizations that wish to control the flow of information and the sharing of data?
Make it a human right to have access to the Internet, possibly at a cost, but the price must be reasonable. Make it impossible for countries to make laws that force ISPs to play police and cut your off from the internet. Make it impossible for governments to censor the flow of information, including a complete disconnection when it suits them.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
Seems like it would be easier to draft a treaty that prevents governments from taking down or censoring the net.
you are a naive idiot, and I am shocked that you've managed to survive past your pubescent years. It's much more likely that you're simply trolling.
Not so; we have the technical infrastructure in place so the naive can survive pretty much forever at this point with only minor harm to themselves. Far more likely he really is that naive. I hesitate to call him stupid though, just badly uninformed.
Unfortunately that is almost more dangerous because uninformed naive users make bad choices that other people assume are smart (because they are smart otherwise), and follow along... a true idiot can do little harm.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
what ip , what dns?
A network of mobile phones using bluetooth and wifi .
It wouldn't look like the inter
net we have today . it would look like the networks we had 20 years ago. spam was less of a problem because the transfer nodes are not anonymous so reputation can be assigned.
Mesh networks, everyone interconnected, no-one having an ISP. Sounds great, at least from an "extremely difficult to shut down" point of view.
But if no-one on the mesh has an ISP, how does the mesh connect to the outside world? Never mind Twitter or Facebook, how do people get to "traditional" media outlets, or even Google for that matter?
It's official. Most of you are morons.
If I build a go-kart track out back, and you use it to skateboard, do not be surprised if one day, I blow your ass to kingdom-come !! It is MY track. You use it by my grace.
Keywords to excite reviewers: blowed up real good !!
http://www.kingsbridgelink.co.uk/
http://www.open-mesh.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_community_network
http://freenetproject.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeshBox
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Your neighborhood is full of jerks, full of people who want to steal your bank details, get you arrested for CP, peep at nude photos of your partner. Trusting them is far more insane than trusting people that, at least in theory, you get to pick.
I believe that it's possible to build distributed systems where you don't trust everyone involved, but only trust that a certain fraction (often at least half or at least two thirds) of the involved parties are honest.
It seems much more likely that at least half of the Jo(e) Randoms doesn't have the time and inclination to fiddle with the routing table on his "internet box" to screw you over than people who want power will abstain from using power to force themselves into your internet box. Especially when Joe Random can find amateur pictures of someone else's partner.
Also, even though I live in the bad part of town, I think my part of town is filled with at least 95% good people, a few who do a little bad because they're put into a sucky position by "The System", and 0.1% who are just fucked up. People generally want to get along. That's in part also why markets work (reasonably well).
People like you will probably never get this because you are to self-centered but the original design of the Internet was to route AROUND damage. Not through it. The Internet kept working just fine around Egypt. In military terms this would have meant that if a region had been nuked, other regions would still be able to communicate AROUND it. It was NEVER meant to keep working in a nuked area. Is the word "around" really that complex to comprehend?
With more traditional infrastructure, if you knock out a hub, ALL communication stops. If I blow up a gas pipe, the flow of gas stops, there is no way it can re-route the gas through different pipes automatically. The Internet can. Simplest proof? Cable modem goes out, mobile internet dongle takes over without me ever noticing (except for the providers mail stating "we own you now")
Since the cutout of Egypt did not affect Israel or Libya or indeed anyone else, the Internet did its job of routing around damage.
The Internet works, your brain does not.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Unified services in existence LONG before Twitter and facebook.
Mail, ordinary mail, you know, like on paper? It was a unified service with me being able to send a letter from anywhere in the world to anywhere else in the world and it just getting there with a locally bought stamp. People don't think this is amazing anymore but you can buy a stamp from your tiny village post-office and it can travel the globe. In days gone by people mailed each other more then once per day and mail was delivered several times per day as well. All this long before computers were invented.
Email? Again, a unified system because I could mail from any mail program to anyother mail program and it would just get there. But apparently nobody ever used it. Nope. Totally unheard of, I talk to a geek and know he is a true geek for having heard of email... nerdy stuff that.
Usenet, the amount of data far exceeds that off all social sites put together and has done so for decades now.
As for checking facebook 10-20 times a day... so less then once per hour? My email checks every 30 seconds. I cut down.
Facebook is only a world changer to kiddies who never saw anything before. If you were older then 12 you would remember MySpace. That you don't says a LOT about social sites.
They have been around before, locked into themselves and disappearing when the next big thing comes along. Email? SMS? usenet? Mail? still here.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
No one has tagged this story with routearoundthedamagage. I wonder why.
What this has me thinking about is what equipment should I add to my disaster kit to enable me to participate in assembling an ad-hoc community network in the event that the Internet is not available due to natural disaster or deliberate disruption.
A full set of all DD-WRT firmware and a copy of the wiki, a full set of all HSMM-MESH related firmware, software and documentation, lots of routers that work with those firmwares (so lots of WRT54G-series and WRT300Ns, and you'll need some for mesh nodes and some for public APs, which are not mesh nodes, so don't skimp), any of the hardware necessary to make those routers run from batteries, solar panels that can power those routers, and lots of antennas and any hardware necessary to retrofit removable antennas to routers with fixed antennas. HSMM-MESH is the closest working thing we currently have to a fully-distributed wireless mesh network, pretty similar to the "commu-net" idea I've been talking about for a while (I think the author of TFA has been reading my posts :P - only half joking.)
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Indeed there severe questions on lack of effective freedoms, government abuse, and several similar isses on all sides in the US. And everyone wastes time debating it among themselves, wagging fingers at each other, as if any of that would influence the gov't, laws and corporations. Change talk should be on large protests and nothing else. Egypt shows one thing clearly, discussions with a government is best done by millions of organized protesters, less than that is of mess less effectiveness. Freedoms in many countries have numerous restrictions as well, the legality of establishing such a thing as "free speech zones" in the US were a laughable, excellent example. "Yes you have freedom but with limits and I make them" is just a soft-speaking newspeak way of completely doing away with any real rights.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
That's what we need. Everyone should own a home mesh router, with multiple fiber and wifi links. And we need to run our servers too. We link our InterCitizen networks to other networks any way we please. TCP/IP is a form of speech if I ever saw one. If I discuss illegal stuff over any sort of form of speech I wish, you can arrest me, for that crime, but you can't censor my connection for it any more than you can censor my copying machine, soapbox or pen and paper.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Let them try to shut down millions of small radio transceivers.
with luck people will learn to speak and write without twitter and facebook once again...
Actually, I do think this is an instance of rightfully trading security for liberty. No matter how "unusable" it may seem from loads of spam, there is a glimmer of freedom, and 0.00000000001 amount of freedom>0 internet (total internet blockage) censorship and still more than nothing at all.
IPV6 will help a lot in doing it.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
As opposed to being a convenient communication channel for dissidents, might some governments want to keep Facebook, Twitter et all for "bread and circuses" purposes?
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
I don't normally like to nitpick Pickens' writing, but this:
Back before the internet, many early computer hobbyists networked on Fidonet...
is so false a statement it borders on misleading. And if you can't nitpick the grammatical use of "internet" on /. then what are we doing here? :)
Even by loose standards I think we can agree that an (ARPA) internet existed prior to "computer hobbyist" being an affordable past-time.
Personally as a layman, I consider UUCP (1977+) to be the practical genesis of distributed network communication and file sharing.
And even if you don't buy that, the DNS system and top level domains were established in '83, and FidoNet in '84.
Besides briefly running a BBS I remember using Fido a lot, including sending out e-mails.
Really? You propose that water producers shouldn't be regulated and that surviving members of families that have lost people to arsenic poisoning should wait until their loved ones die, then try to find the cause, and then sue for material damages? Wouldn't you think that not having poisonous water in the first place is a preferred solution?
Absolutely not having poisonous water in the first place is THE preferred solution.
That's why you get the government OUT of business.
Completely.
No more limited liability for companies. No 10 Million dollar cap for deep water oil drilling.
No subsidies to any company.
Do you think people running a company that provided water wouldn't be at all concerned about the quality of their product if they had their own necks on the line?
Also saying that regulations prevent anything is completely wrong. Regulations exist only because government already has created the moral hazard of setting up laws such that there is very limited liability to people running various firms by the virtue of government protection.
There should be no government protection for anything against anything.
You can't handle the truth.
Another key technology for an Internet immune to strangulation by governments is location-independent content.
It would help if there was a content virtualization layer, which fragments, encrypts, and redundantly distributes content. Content later coalesces when requested.
This needs to be based on open protocols, with the technology globally distributed and many of the content servers at the edge of the network in countless peoples' homes. No individual will be liable for hosting any particular content, because the technology will ensure that they do not know what is on their computer. Just some random fragments; multiply encrypted byteblocks.
For performance it should be a mix of pure P2P and server-farm based infrastructure, but it is mandatory that no single company or organization own the infrastructure. It should be as pervasive and distributed as DNS, but for URI-addressable content.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Mine does: teksavvy in Canada.
And there are some commercial sites that offer usenet for a fee, typically $5 per month for a limited feed.
And, of course, there's gmane, which has a whole set of its own newsgroups, mostly usenet mirrors for various mailing lists. But I can't call this usenet, although it does use usenet protocols.
-- hendrik
Why would anyone produce ANYTHING in that case. When it turns out in 10 years that the paint I used on the CDs I sold caused cancer (which I had no way to know about) and I can be sued into non-existence. Or that distilled water leeches out vital nutrients and kills people, or that adding minerals to water causes some sort of allergic reaction and kills people, or not adding minerals to water causes some sort of allergic reaction and kills people (or all 3), and I get sued into oblivion?
With unlimited liability to individuals based on actions of someone else in the company, why would anyone in their right mind own a company?
It was a trap I left open, that you walked right into.
The Comcast throttling is not something that current or even proposed regulation would do anything about, because the way it worked was Comcast forging response traffic that confused the network on your system.
Now do you understand the problem with trying to solve problems that do not exist?
So yes - Really.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
#Internet ID format:
255 byte Unicode string (1 byte reserved for implementation eg: pascal prefix byte or C null byte)
maximum character length determined by worst case UTF encoding. (42?)
Anything allowed except an illegal character list (such as control characters) and a character map containing ambiguous characters such as the few kinds of quotation characters. Its the user's fault if they use things others can't type or remember.
May want to ban a few URI reserved characters to avoid browser entry issues... but I'm not sure about that.
I'd like some reserved symbol to prefix or postfix ALL IDs so we have a simple way to spot them; like how we have @ in emails. Something people can type.... I kind of like # as a prefix... (partially because of its use on numbering people; somewhat paying homage to those who'd oppose the concept of an internet ID. is "iID" going too far? Apple will sue...) The symbol wouldn't be part of the actual ID itself but would be a convention for identifying it...although forcing its use may be necessary (if you didn't need @ then a lot of people wouldn't type it.)
A set of guidelines to making unique IDs that will last but no technical enforcement on these.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Just sayin'
Firstly -- a robust network needs an alternative to spanning tree. When an alternate link is discovered, it's used. I suspect that doing this for a large network is not a trivial problem.
Various proposals have been made for mesh networks. Consider the bandwidth issue. Consider a town of 10,000 covering a square mile or so. Let's suppose there is a wifi point every 100 feet. That means that a packet requires 50 repeats to get across a mile of town.
Latency?
Most of these wifi points better not be just repeaters either. Else you get packets running in circles.
The two problems are essentially identical, just different in scale.
I think to solve it, the network has to be aware of more than it's local topology. It has to understand how it's distributed in space.
Third Career: Tree Farmer Second Career: Computer Geek First Career: Teacher, Outdoor Instructor, Photographer.
The problem with email is that it is tied to a HOST with that domain name. This is a problem when you change domains for various reasons and a 3rd party is always involved in that domain name. To have an ID that sticks with you a lifetime you can't be restricted by 3rd parties (yes you can buy your domain and then somebody can later sue you for having their name and take it away from you with their hired 'guns.')
Your legal name works but often has too many people with the same name - you CAN go and get your name changed or just have people who know you use a nickname. I'm not proposing anything where you'd be limited to just 1 ID and couldn't have an anonymous ID by the mere fact that I'm saying we can't have any authentication as part of the naming convention aspect of the IDs. Each part is loosely coupled and independent meaning it has maximum flexibility.
You could be john.doe@foo.org, I don't see why I'd rule that out and many people probably would do that-- but it could remain their ID after foo.org goes bust and just not use it as email address anymore... which is why it would be wise to NOT use an email address.
My schools could give out my ID and legal name as being a student, because this is a matter of public record and I could choose to use that ID; the government could assign ones as well; but I don't have to use it. some clever facebook like service could link up my IDs over the years (and don't think somebody wouldn't) but due to the lack of authentication in many uses of that ID you couldn't be sure about everything done in my ID-- just like my name. I could post things all over the place in your name without repercussions and it is until authentication enters that we start to get into legal issues with identity theft. That is a separate problem; even then you'd still have duplicates but with different authentication so you could use that to separate the duplicates just like we do with the millions of people with the same legal name but different photo IDs etc.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
isnt any public forum in any location a "target" and potential "pulse beat" of that said public for ANY government??
Joe Investor
They are already doing warrantless wiretapping. If the net is shut down, one way around that would be more wireless networks on more frequencies:
http://main-fm.org/2011/02/03/could-it-happen-here-2/
AOL "just worked" and the WEB killed it and it never worked as well as far as the many technical problems - it was more open ended to new ideas and participation which made it adapt faster than AOL's top-down dictatorial approach.
A system that merely provides 2 things:
1) an ID format that encourages one to use a global username for everything not locked in like email
2) a P2P discovery protocol so facebook and others can interoperate with your contacts list. almost like some sort of LDAP.
Like the WEB, other people create the applications on top which work OK because of standards. I'm not saying it has to be 1 app or 1 website - just like HTML and HTTP were not about netscape or simple hypertext.
We're talking BUILDING BLOCKS; I'm not trying to create an open source product; but spur some people to create another network of protocols and standards to support another decentralized network.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news