Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hong Kong Protesters Use Mesh Networks To Organize

Posted by Soulskill on from the can't-stop-the-signal dept.

wabrandsma sends this article from New Scientist: Hong Kong's mass protest is networked. Activists are relying on a free app that can send messages without any cellphone connection. Since the pro-democracy protests turned ugly over the weekend, many worry that the Chinese government would block local phone networks. In response, activists have turned to the FireChat app to send supportive messages and share the latest news. On Sunday alone, the app was downloaded more than 100,000 times in Hong Kong, its developers said. FireChat relies on "mesh networking," a technique that allows data to zip directly from one phone to another via Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. Ordinarily, if two people want to communicate this way, they need to be fairly close together. But as more people join in, the network grows and messages can travel further. Mesh networks can be useful for people who are caught in natural disasters or, like those in Hong Kong, protesting under tricky conditions. FireChat came in handy for protesters in Taiwan and Iraq this year."

85 comments

  1. For disasters by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Funny

    Interesting! I first heard that idea from David Brin, who was proposing it as something to be used for disasters.
    http://davidbrin.wordpress.com...
    Maybe the governent of Hong Kong qualifies as a disaster.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:For disasters by wvmarle · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe the governent of Hong Kong qualifies as a disaster.

      As a Hong Kong resident, I can confirm this part.

      This government's arrogance and repeated insults towards its own people (the currently offered reform package I consider one of such insults, there've been many occasions of the government not taking the people seriously before - "we're the government, we know what's best, so you may shut up now") is part of what makes these protests so big.

    2. Re:For disasters by iserlohn · · Score: 1

      A part of the problem is that the executive and other political appointees in power in HK is very much geared towards the appeasement of Beijing and will not confront them on the behalf of the people of HK.

      The communist party has indicated that they will not take back a decree on the Chief Exec election (basically rigging and interference from Beijing on the nomination process, so you get to vote for a choice of 3 different puppets). That just shows how arrogant these politicians are in Beijing - and yet they accuse the students of not compromising.

      --
      :. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
    3. Re:For disasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am just curious: When did British government allow democracy in Hong Kong in its 150-year ruling? And Why have I never seen Hong Kong people protest against British government for democracy? Can I call Hong Kong people racist?

    4. Re:For disasters by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      That, too. Infrastructure projects like the high-speed rail to Guangzhou and (even more so) the Hong Kong - Macau - Zhuhai bridge (mostly paid for by Hong Kong, which stands to have the least, if any, benefits from the project) are a prime example of that.

      The reform package offered by Beijing is worse than what many thought would be a worst-case scenario. As it stands, there is no chance for it to be implemented. Keeping the existing system is a more favourable option for many, as at least in that case it's obvious who's selecting the CE. A public vote on Beijing-sanctioned candidates would give the CE a faux legitimacy.

      At the moment it appears the HK and Chinese governments have decided to play the waiting game: hope that the protesters get tired, hope that the people inconvenienced by the protests turn against the protesters, and that the protests will die out naturally. Of course, this will eventually happen, however it's anyone's guess how long the governments are willing to play this game. For the moment the pro-democracy movement appears to have overwhelming public support, some businesses even explicitly allowed their staff to take time off "to do things more important than work".

      How it's going to end, I really don't know. I'm quite sure it's not going to be pretty. No matter what, it will be a milestone in Hong Kong's political development.

    5. Re:For disasters by iserlohn · · Score: 1

      The next step will be the protesters blocking the government from functioning by blocking entrances to government buildings and facilities. The HK government will be partially paralysed and this will be the real test. CY Leung has already lost control of the situation and the narrative is definitely on the protesters side right now.

      I have a feeling that this will end with the intervention of Beijing one way or another, which is what Bj is trying desperately to avoid. There is no scenario for the central government to get involved which will not damage them in some way. The fact that Mainland politics is really old-fashioned and based heavily on "saving face" compounds the difficulty. From the protesters point of view though, it is not their problem - A political apparatus that isn't flexible or modern is a fault of China, not Hong Kong. I think it is an excellent test for Beijing on how to deal with an educated, engaged and motivated populace that doesn't see any reason to respect its legitimacy, because it's not going to be the last time they need to deal with it, isn't it?

      --
      :. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
    6. Re:For disasters by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      The fact that Mainland politics is really old-fashioned and based heavily on "saving face" compounds the difficulty. From the protesters point of view though, it is not their problem - A political apparatus that isn't flexible or modern is a fault of China, not Hong Kong. I think it is an excellent test for Beijing on how to deal with an educated, engaged and motivated populace that doesn't see any reason to respect its legitimacy, because it's not going to be the last time they need to deal with it, isn't it?

      This "saving face" is not just politics - it's culture. It doesn't account just for the mainland government, also for the HK government, and even (to a lesser extent) the opposition politicians. For individuals and companies not having to lose face is just as important as it is for politicians. For the central government there's even more at stake, as president Xi has been working hard to cement his power in the mainland, and if he gives in to Hong Kong protests, that could give reason to mainlanders to start protests as well - if the government gives in once, it may happen again.

      Many HK people will also not question the legitimacy of the Beijing government directly, certainly not as much as the legitimacy of the HK government is questioned. The mainland government I believe is mostly accepted as a fact, something we have to live with and we're not going to change. It's also seen as a government that should stay out of Hong Kong's internal affairs - let them take care of the foreign and defence policies, leave everything else to Hong Kong. Some may respect that government, others not so much, it's not something the Hongkongers can do anything about.

      CY already called the protests of being "out of control". The local daily South China Morning Post correctly added that he probably meant that it was out of his control.

      How the officials managed to reach Golden Bauhinia Square this morning for their ceremony, I really don't know. Many roads in the vicinity were occupied, so getting their in their oversized limos would have been an issue. The ceremony has been short, the fireworks tonight were cancelled. No matter what, the HK government lost quite a bit of face here.

      Anyway, there are indeed not that many people in Hong Kong that care too much about the central or HK government losing face. Not many will be out to deliberately make them lose face which again is against Chinese culture, however in this case Hong Kong's interests come first, helping them not losing face is a distant second.

    7. Re:For disasters by iserlohn · · Score: 1

      Your post is insightful, but I have to disagree on your main point. HK politics is not about saving face. If it was, then CY would have been ousted long ago. HK leaders are propped up by Beijing, irrespective of the feeling of locals. There is no need to save face as their political reputation is not where they derive power from (unlike the politics inside the CPC).

      My point is that the demands of the protesters, which will inevitably lead to Beijing losing face if they gave in, is the result of the different culture in Hong Kong. They are forcing China's leaders into a reality they are not comfortable with and what will happen is anybody's guess.

      Just because that HKers by and large accept that sovereignty rests with Beijing doesn't mean that HKers respect the legitimacy of the government there. You said that it's not something they can do anything about, but this protest is in reality a direct challenge to Beijing - CY Leung is just a proxy!

      --
      :. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
    8. Re:For disasters by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      Indeed. CY is a proxy. Having him step down would indeed mean a massive loss of face for the Chinese government, it'd be the second CE that has to resign as a result of mass protests (Tung Chee-Hwa officially resigned for health reasons iirc, but it's widely believed the real reason was the mass protest earlier that year). That, plus the inevitable retraction of the reform package that'd follow.

      Interesting times ahead!

    9. Re:For disasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the governent of Hong Kong qualifies as a disaster.

      As a Hong Kong resident, I can confirm this part.

      This government's arrogance and repeated insults towards its own people (the currently offered reform package I consider one of such insults, there've been many occasions of the government not taking the people seriously before - "we're the government, we know what's best, so you may shut up now") is part of what makes these protests so big.

      Dude, you might also consider stop coming across as a total douchebag.
      You think Hong Kong government is a disaster, but YOU chose to live there. Perhaps because of financial reasons, but whatever your excuse, it clearly contradicts your assertion that HK government is a disaster.
      If you think HK is bad, you can do better with your obvious lack of skills in logical arguments elsewhere...instead of coming across as a hypocritical dbag.

    10. Re:For disasters by TheRealLifeboy · · Score: 1

      You should acquaint yourself with some history, which you probably didn't learn at your big-government sponsored school. John James Cowperthwaite was the Financial Secreterary of Hong Kong from 1961 to 1971. His "positive non-interventionism became the focus of his economic policy as Financial Secretary. He refused to collect economic statistics to avoid officials meddling in the economy.
      Commentators have credited his management of the economy of Hong Kong as a leading example of how small government encourages growth" according to Wikipedia.

      This is what formed the modern Hong Kong into what it is despite the preceding 150 years of British rule.

    11. Re:For disasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Greetings Pot, I see you've met Kettle!

    12. Re: For disasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really understand what democracy is, child? When did Hong Kong people can elect British govenor and senior officials when Hong Kong was ruled by British government?

    13. Re:For disasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allow me to make the suggestion that you should acquaint yourself with GP's question. Which you probably didn't comprehend with your small bird brain.
      Was democracy allowed during British rule?
      I have to google some of these names but from the images available I further suggest you don't have money against the wager that Hong Kong Governors weren't anything other than white Britons.

    14. Re:For disasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      forgot the list link.

  2. Should have used a neural net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because that is so much more hollywood-tech

  3. Seattle Times looking for first hand reports by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Apparently, breakingnews at seattletimes dot com is looking for first hand Hong Kong reports from protestors.

    Also, Yahoo has been turned off in much of Hong Kong so that residents can't find out about what's going on.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re: Seattle Times looking for first hand reports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm in Hong Kong and have access to everything including Yahoo. It may have been turned off in China though.

    2. Re: Seattle Times looking for first hand reports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only some searches get blocked, but it's done by hacking the connection rather than by Yahoo themselves.

    3. Re: Seattle Times looking for first hand reports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no internet filtering in Hong Kong. The great firewall of china apparatus doesn't exist there.

    4. Re: Seattle Times looking for first hand reports by atrimtab · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is easy to defeat with a simple 2.4ghz jammer in the protest area. Both Bluetooth and most WiFi would be disabled. So the devices cannot mesh. Turn off the cell networks and ability of protesters to coordinate is gone.

      So it could be useful when Government is not the adversary such as in a disaster, but is easily disabled by Government if that is it's intention during protests.

      --
      Facebook is billions of individual "Skinner Boxes." And if you use it you are the pigeon!
    5. Re: Seattle Times looking for first hand reports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most phones now also have a 5.2ghz wifi, either a,n, or ac, which would not be significantly affected, unless a broad-spectrum jammer was used.

  4. requires Internet-based sign-up by WiPEOUT · · Score: 3, Informative

    FireChat requires that users create an account online (with an email address) before they can use the app. This and the lack of encryption limits its usefulness.

    1. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but the ad-hoc nature of it makes it incredibly handy.. i'm not sure if "security" it paramount when you are literally in the shit.. if you're being shot at by the government, who the fuck cares about your texts are in the clear? the point of this thing is to spread the word, quickly... encryption would HINDER info being shared.

    2. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      FireChat requires that users create an account online (with an email address) before they can use the app. This and the lack of encryption limits its usefulness.

      It's available from both the Apple App Store and Google Play. People downloading it from either source already have given them an email addy.

      All this means is that the Chinese government will try harder to break into Google's nd Apple's servers.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to everyone who's using it right now. No, you're just thinking about it too much.

    4. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by apraetor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just because the app can be installed via the Google Play store doesn't mean it *has* to be installed that way. Android users can also transfer the app directly to each other via NFC (when available), WiFi, and Bluetooth.

    5. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      Just because the app can be installed via the Google Play store doesn't mean it *has* to be installed that way. Android users can also transfer the app directly to each other via NFC (when available), WiFi, and Bluetooth.

      You forgot one - they can easily put it into developer mode and load stuff via usb from a laptop, etc. :-)

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    6. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's funny you think Apple haven't caved to China and given them the same access they give the NSA.
      Or are you forgetting Apple put some servers into China recently due to security concerns...

    7. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So send false messages with this one. Find some other app that is encrypted and doesn't require registration for sending the real content.

    8. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      Encryption doesn't make sense as currently all conversations on this app are public. So even if it's all encrypted, all your adversaries would have to do is connect to the app, and they're able to see whatever you see. Encryption is great for keeping private stuff, private. The app makers say they'll add encryption the moment they add private chat rooms.

      Now the thing of these big demonstrations is that you have tens of thousands of people connect at the same time to one chat room. Even if that's a private, encrypted chat room, at such numbers it's impossible to keep any eavesdroppers out - you can't vet just everyone, so the police and others may just pretend to be a protester and connect.

      The requirement to create an account online, that's a whole different matter. That's irritating at best. However as soon as you're using the app through the regular mobile data networks ("on the grid") you can still be tracked down - albeit a whole lot harder.

    9. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If you're literally in the shit, then no apps are going to help at all - I'd recommend a shower and a lot of soap.
      Literally doesn't mean "a lot of".

    10. Re:requires Internet-based sign-up by macromorgan · · Score: 1

      Then maybe they should be using a series of Pirate Boxes (http://piratebox.cc/)? Although they would only exist in smaller nodes, since they currently don't all mesh together it would still allow you to chat and post pictures/files anonymously, all without going online.

  5. About fucking time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've been saying this since the story about Terra Nova from Finland. All the money we spent after 9/11 on "wireless disaster preparedness" could have been covered by this idea alone.

    For years I have also advocated having a B52 full of cheap mesh cell phones and base stations to drop on any Arab Spring like event.

    -F34nor

    1. Re:About fucking time. by CRCulver · · Score: 0

      For years I have also advocated having a B52 full of cheap mesh cell phones and base stations to drop on any Arab Spring like event.

      Even when countries are toppling longstanding leaders in a move that might bring them closer to the US, the US doesn't dare violate airspace so brazenly. (Even in Syria right now, the US is targeting rebel forces in the north, and it has stayed well clear of Assad Damascus during the whole Syria saga of the last years.) Think about it, the leadership is going to have the best defenses gathered around itself, and if a US plane were shot down, it would make the US and the current president look bad, and so it's not worth the risk trying to stir up the mob just a bit more.

    2. Re:About fucking time. by martas · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The wireless networking research community has been working on mesh/ad-hoc networks for over a decade, citing communication in disaster areas as (one of the) main applications. At some point some people started to sort of laugh at it ("oh look, another mesh networking paper!"), because despite all the research it didn't seem to get any closer to reality. My guess would be that the reason why we're seeing it finally being used is because in order to be feasible, you need the density of devices to be above a certain threshold, which means a) it was never going to work in the pre-smartphone era -- with smartphones, you can just download an app to do it, but otherwise you'd pretty much need to spend major $$ to get the necessary number of dedicated devices out there, or else there needs to be wide-scale agreement to implement a specific protocol on all new devices, which was never going to happen because it's not a selling point, b) it won't really work in major natural disasters, because, well in order to maintain the density of devices, a large number of people need to have continuous access to power, which is unlikely if a disaster is so severe that communication infrastructure is offline (I imagine celltowers are less fragile than power lines).

      --
      weinersmith
    3. Re:About fucking time. by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, speaking from experience in the Japan 2011 earthquake, you are kind of on the mark kind of not.

      b) it won't really work in major natural disasters, because, well in order to maintain the density of devices, a large number of people need to have continuous access to power, which is unlikely if a disaster is so severe that communication infrastructure is offline (I imagine celltowers are less fragile than power lines).

      After power was turned back on, I, and a lot of other people, went out and bought a hand-cranked USB charger(also doubles as a flashlight and radio, a handy device to be sure). It doesn't take that much energy to power a cell phone.
      As for the tower issue, the towers where I was at(Tsukuba, which is about halfway between Tokyo and Fukushima) all kept power even after the quake but since so many people were using their phones to either call people or check the news it was almost impossible to get through(the bandwidth of the tower may have very well been degraded as well). A mesh network *might* have been useful there, but it would have had to have enough density to work. Really the biggest problem with using a mesh network for disaster is that anywhere you have enough people to support a mesh network, you could probably just as easily use a bullhorn to communicate.

      --
      Monstar L
    4. Re:About fucking time. by toQDuj · · Score: 1

      If, by "halfway between Tokyo and Fukushima", you mean it's a hell of a lot closer to Tokyo (60km) than Fukushima (200km). And I live there too, though I was in Hyogo at the time of the quake so didn't feel anything.

      One rather nice outcome, though, is the SafeCast project. This project revolves around continuous mapping of the environment through bps-logger-coupled gamma spectrometers.

      --
      Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
    5. Re:About fucking time. by toQDuj · · Score: 1

      (should be GPS-logger-coupled but autocorrect reverted my aborted autocorrect).

      --
      Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
    6. Re:About fucking time. by martas · · Score: 1
      Ah, interesting.

      After power was turned back on, I, and a lot of other people, went out and bought a hand-cranked USB charger(also doubles as a flashlight and radio, a handy device to be sure). It doesn't take that much energy to power a cell phone.

      Unfortunately, I think a significant level of such individual disaster-preparedness will always be the exception, not the rule.

      As for the tower issue, the towers where I was at(Tsukuba, which is about halfway between Tokyo and Fukushima) all kept power even after the quake but since so many people were using their phones to either call people or check the news it was almost impossible to get through(the bandwidth of the tower may have very well been degraded as well). A mesh network *might* have been useful there, but it would have had to have enough density to work.

      I agree with your hesitation there -- in that scenario, it seems like the presence of a mesh network might make the congestion problem worse.

      --
      weinersmith
    7. Re:About fucking time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US doesn't care about anyones airspace on a good day. How many countries currently have drones flying about, and then how many more they you are unaware of. Have you been listening to the Presidents speeches recently. We will get you 'wherever' you hide etc.
      To think the US wouldn't already be agitating the crowd into action from within already is extremely naive, to think they would be scared to fly 'humanitarian relief missions' to 'protect innocent civilians' in a spring type event is just ridiculous.

    8. Re:About fucking time. by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      The US doesn't care about anyones airspace on a good day. How many countries currently have drones flying about, and then how many more they you are unaware of.

      Drones don't have human beings on board who could get shot down and make the current administration look bad. Note that the OP spoke of "B52s", a bomber piloted by human beings on board.

      To think the US wouldn't already be agitating the crowd into action from within already is extremely naive

      Of course the intelligence agencies of various states (and not just the US) would be agitating the crowd from within. But the methods they already use to do so probably seem effective enough, so why take the risk of flying a bomber over the territory?

      ...to think they would be scared to fly 'humanitarian relief missions' to 'protect innocent civilians' in a spring type event is just ridiculous.

      One can never say never, but in "Arab Spring" events so far, the US has maintained a more shadowy role that what the OP proposed, and I don't think that is going to change. US politicians still remember Somalia. Presidential administrations do not want a debacle of "our boys" being shot down in a hostile state unless there is a full-on international conflict already going on.

    9. Re:About fucking time. by F34nor · · Score: 1

      FYI; B52s are hard to fuck with.

    10. Re:About fucking time. by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they are so hard to fuck with that over thirty of them were lost during the Vietnam War.

    11. Re:About fucking time. by Nimey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Imagine the reaction to our flying a B-52 with its bomb bay doors open low over a foreign city. Imagine how many people would be killed in the ensuing stampede, to say nothing of the air defense's reaction.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    12. Re:About fucking time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in silicon valley and volunteer with an amateur radio emergency preparedness group. I didn't work the event where we actually built one, but I think it was in the spring of this year.

      Amateur radio folk know how to put up makeshift towers (or may already have fixed towers), often have generators or some sort of emergency power and have the desire and knowhow to do these sorts of things. We practice it too.

      Our design used the towers to build the mesh and each tower optionally provided access to a small cell. The network supported SIP so you could use standard SIP aware phones (built in to some android phones and as an app for others).

      If you stuck within Part 15 rules, you can just link up any interesting zones with access points and it is effectively your own WAN.

      You can read about what ours is built upon http://www.scc-ares-races.org/mesh/

    13. Re:About fucking time. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Some disaster-preparedness integration between cellular tech and ham radio could be a powerful communications tool in emergencies - and in times of political unrest.

      PS: I was once a contract software developer at Tsukuba, in its very early days, when it was just emerging from the rice fields.

    14. Re:About fucking time. by jandersen · · Score: 1

      For years I have also advocated having a B52 full of cheap mesh cell phones and base stations to drop on any Arab Spring like event.

      Really? And what would that achieve?

      It is incredibly naive to think that the mere introduction of Western style democracy and -constitution would magically solve all problems. It didn't happen that way in the West - it took several generations, during which time people got educated to the new ideas via debates, protests, and later on, school, and that process is still ongoing. Democracy is worthless if people are not willing to play by the rules - the losers have to accept that they didn't win this time, and the winners have to understand that they must rule for the benefit of all, even their opponents. And enshrining rights and freedoms in law is worthless if people don't sincerely respect the rights of others, even when it is to their own disadvantage.

      To return to the protesters in Hong Kong - the same applies here. That is not to say that democracy is not a good idea; I think even the Chinese government recognises that. But it has to be introduced the right way, gradually. Perhaps it would be a good idea if the state government came out in public and addressed the issue head on, and presented a long-term plan for how it should happen. Most people can accept that things can take time to achieve.

    15. Re:About fucking time. by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Really the biggest problem with using a mesh network for disaster is that anywhere you have enough people to support a mesh network, you could probably just as easily use a bullhorn to communicate.

      A bullhorn is useful for general announcements, but not specific ones like "We need Fred to come in early for a shift at the hospital due to an emergency."

      Sure, you can put that out over the bullhorn at 3AM, but if you have a constant trickle of those then nobody anywhere gets sleep, and then Fred ends up killing somebody due to a fatigue-induced surgical error.

      The advantage of a mesh network is that you can get the message to Fred whose phone rings, without having to bug every other human being in the city. The downside is that nobody wants a non-centrally-controlled mesh network for the same reasons that Beijing doesn't want it.

    16. Re:About fucking time. by Nimey · · Score: 0

      Are you fucking stupid? B-52s are an obsolete design with a huge radar profile that are only in service because they're excellent cruise missile carriers and well-understood enough to be quite reliable.

      It would be nothing for a reasonably modern air force to shoot an unescorted B-52 down either with SAMs or fighters.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    17. Re:About fucking time. by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      I've got a solar powered charger which also has a battery in, so it can charge a cell phone at night as well.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  6. LTE D2D by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

    I wonder if LTE D2D still works if the network gets turned off. Since its not out yet, wonder if there are kill switches.

    1. Re: LTE D2D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The power switch is pretty reliable.

  7. Mesh networks by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    We're jammin', we're jammin', we're jammin', we're jammin';
    Hope you like jammin', too..

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Mesh networks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, jammin' the signal!!

  8. Silly capitalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These Hong Kongese have become fat and spoiled by wealth stolen from their exploited victims. They must not resist the just forces of China rectifying their crimes, and we in the West should not aid and abet them with our media and networks.

    1. Re:Silly capitalists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Another eruption of fascists, just like Ukraine.

  9. I wonder what a government node could do. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Mesh networking, peer-to-peer, power to the decentralized people -- it all sounds great. But some of those people will still be on the side of the government. I wonder how much information one mesh node could accumulate to incriminate other participants? How many of "the people" will be willing to participate in an uprising like this if they know that a government stooge is likely no more than two or three hops away?

    1. Re:I wonder what a government node could do. by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wonder how much information one mesh node could accumulate to incriminate other participants? How many of "the people" will be willing to participate in an uprising like this if they know that a government stooge is likely no more than two or three hops away?

      You do realize that most of these protesters are literally standing two or three steps away from a government stooge wearing riot gear, right? It's not like they're even trying to blend in.

      I think we're forgetting our history here. Peaceful protest only works if it seriously inconveniences as many people as possible for as long as necessary. Politely camping in a park without a permit doesn't really cut it. If they're using tear gas on you, it's a start. If they're using water cannon on you, you're getting somewhere. If they're setting dogs on you and hauling you away to county lockup by the busload, you're doing it right.

      People forget exactly what happened during the Civil Rights movement in the United States. It's peaceful protest only on the protester's side. On the side of the so-called civil authorities, it's decidedly not peaceful, and rarely civil. And this has to go on for quite a long time. Literally years.

      Occupy Wall Street accomplished nothing because none of that happened. These protests in Hong Kong will likely accomplish just as little. They're carefully avoiding inconveniencing anyone. Nothing happens if you do that. We demonstrated exactly that in the US. Hong Kong should learn from our mistakes. If they want to actually change things, they have to get obnoxious and get hauled away by those riot gear-equipped policemen. In droves. By the thousands. Or since we're talking about Chinese numbers here, by the tens of thousands. (It takes some serious effort to match per capita numbers in China.) Being careful not to interfere means you can be ignored, not just by authority, but by the man on the street as well. You must inconvenience people. You must interfere. You must do so as peacefully as possible, but you must do so.

      Most recently, the US did it wrong. We in the US weren't willing to pay the price to get the oligarchs to back down. The populations of several Arab states did it right. Yeah, it hurts. Sorry, but that's what it takes. Are you in China ready?

    2. Re:I wonder what a government node could do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Occupy Wall Street accomplished nothing because none of that happened

      That's because they didn't know what they wanted to accomplish and didn't understand what was going on.

      Most recently, the US did it wrong. We in the US weren't willing to pay the price to get the oligarchs to back down.

      That's because the idea of American oligarchs is a myth. Oh, the US has a class of about a million rich people. That's not "oligarchs", that's just a lot of wealth for a lot of people. They aren't going to "back down" and they aren't hurting anybody.

      They may leave if you make their life to miserable, and take jobs and money with them.

      Doesn't mean that we don't have massive crony capitalism and government corruption either; but ironically, often the politicians most vocal about fighting it are the ones most responsible for it. (e.g.,: Warren's support for Ex-Im, Obama's support for "bailouts" and "stimulus packages").

    3. Re:I wonder what a government node could do. by wvmarle · · Score: 5, Informative

      These protests in Hong Kong will likely accomplish just as little. They're carefully avoiding inconveniencing anyone.

      As said by a true outsider. You're obviously not in Hong Kong.

      Some 200 bus routes affected: cut short or completely out of service. MTR services (which have to take over all those bus passengers) become overloaded - there's already barely any spare capacity left. Many people have problems going to work, or just to travel around town. For tourists it's even worse, some major hotels like the Mandarin Oriental and the Grand Hyatt being in the middle of the protest zones. Well over 100 schools and kindergartens have been closed for a few days already due to the blockades, with students and teachers not being able to get to the schools. Dozens of shops, restaurants and banks had to close (losing income), ATMs running out of money as delivery vans can't get there.

      There is effectively NO traffic possible in Mongkok, Central, Admiralty and parts of Wan Chai and Causeway Bay. Roads affected include Argyle Street and Nathan Road, two main arteries of Kowloon, and Connaught Road Central in Hong Kong, a key artery connecting all the main business districts there.

      It's China National Day today. The fireworks display in Victoria Harbour has been cancelled (that was announced yesterday), this usually attracts hundreds of thousands of people. The official flag raising ceremony this morning, one of the main parts of the official celebrations, lasted less than 10 minutes, with a bunch of protesters in the crowd turning their backs to the flags while they were being raised. Honestly I don't know how those officials actually managed to get to Golden Bauhinia Square, but wouldn't be surprised if helicopters were used (there happens to be a heliport right next to it). It'd be really hard for them to drive there as they usually would do.

      And you say they're not inconveniencing anyone?

      All they are really careful about is to not give the government any excuse to go after them. The grass around the cenotaph on Chater Garden was kept completely free, no-one set foot on it. There's only a 20-cm tall wire fence around it, and signs saying to stay off the grass. The protesters regularly collect garbage, leaving no trash behind. A police van got stuck in the middle of the Mongkok protest zone, recovered by police a day later - completely unharmed. Some bus drivers even donated "their" buses to help block off roads, confident the vehicles will not be damaged.

    4. Re:I wonder what a government node could do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that's some real mass discipline from the protesters.

    5. Re:I wonder what a government node could do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that most of these protesters are literally standing two or three steps away from a government stooge wearing riot gear, right? It's not like they're even trying to blend in.

      What makes you so sure they wouldn't do both ?

      If they're setting dogs on you and hauling you away to county lockup by the busload, you're doing it right.

      You do realize that this also puts you under their control for a while ? More about that below.

      They're carefully avoiding inconveniencing anyone. Nothing happens if you do that.

      The reaction to your protest may be slower or less impressive, but on the other hand, the approach also has its advantages. It is less likely to turn the people who are inconvenienced (and others who care about this inconveniencing) against the cause. It is also less easy for the government to portray the incident as a group of crazy people who they justifiably deal with.

      We demonstrated exactly that in the US. Hong Kong should learn from our mistakes. If they want to actually change things, they have to get obnoxious and get hauled away by those riot gear-equipped policemen. In droves. By the thousands. Or since we're talking about Chinese numbers here, by the tens of thousands. (It takes some serious effort to match per capita numbers in China.)

      I would strongly advice against this, both on general grounds and because the chinese communist party is involved to some degree. It is time for a short history lesson.

      In China, there was an event, that has had far too little media coverage, in 1999 near Zhong Nan Hai (not to be confused with the 1989 event at Tian An Men square). There was a peaceful gathering of Falun Gong practitioners being against wrongful treatment of their group. I am not using the word "protest" here because many of the people were there because they were told that this is where they could appeal to the government about such issues. These people were not being obnoxious or inconveniencing people like you suggest they should, but they were still hauled onto buses and driven away. I am not sure whether you would write this down as a "success" without the obnoxiousness, but the further story is more important.

      These people were put in stadiums and the like, and then they were addressed one by one and asked to sign public statements that they were against Falun Gong. Giving up your faith or conviction under pressure is a big deal, and it would be defeating the purpose of the gathering, so many refused. Of those who refused many were sent to forced labor camps.

      What happened to these people later varies a lot. Some signed statements against Falun Gong after torture and were let out, some died from torture, some stayed in forced labor camps for years and then were let out, some had their organs cut out of their bodies to be sold for profit on the organ market [1].

      Not being obnoxious didn't really avoid being portrayed as lunatics by the propaganda machinery of the communist party. But at least it made it harder. They had to stage an event of fake self immolation to do that, but that's a history lesson for another day.

      If you want to know more about this, I would suggest the recently published book "The Slaughter" by Ethan Gutmann.

      Now, this whole story will almost certainly not repeat in the exact same way in Hong Kong over the current issue. First, I believe the authorities are less prepared in the Hong Kong event than they were for the 1999 event. Second, the Hong Kong group is more diverse. Third, the issues are different. Fourth, this is Hong Kong, which still has some self rule, and the population less subdued by the authorities, so it would be harder to get away with such a thing. Still, I think this story gives an important alternative perspective to the one you portray.

      [1]: Yes, that's right. They cut organs out of living people, then kill and burn them to remove all evidence of this action. And this happens in state controlled hospitals. Although this practice really took off a little later, some of the prisoners from the 1999 event were undoubtedly among the victims of this atrocity.

    6. Re:I wonder what a government node could do. by Slim_Jack · · Score: 1

      If you read Solzhenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago" - a great read, by the way, you see that the protesters are fighting to survive. Unless they succeed, and even if they succeed but keep the status quo government, at some point in the future they can be dragged from their beds at 3am, tortured and held in a cell until they sign their lives away, on the basis of that evidence, plus evidence from anyone else involved who names them after said torture to 'hopefully' get their sentence reduced. Doing a halfway measure now will only delay their execution, imprisonment or exhile.

  10. Technical inaccuracy. by Narcocide · · Score: 0

    FireChat relies on "mesh networking," a technique that allows data to zip directly from one phone to another via Wi-Fi or Bluetooth.

    Probably they mean it allows data to gzip directly from one phone to another. Nobody uses zip for network traffic.

    1. Re:Technical inaccuracy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can use zip if it is fast.

    2. Re:Technical inaccuracy. by apraetor · · Score: 1

      I've often enjoyed the zesty zip feature of miracle whip.

    3. Re:Technical inaccuracy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Probably they mean it allows data to gzip directly from one phone to another. Nobody uses zip for network traffic.

      It depends on bandwidth vs processing power.

      Back in the 90s I used compression on networking due to having 56k bandwidth (yes thats 7 kB/s on LAN!). It actually increased file transfers quite a lot. However when switching to ethernet, bandwidth was no longer an issue and realtime compression actually slowed down file transfers. If the phones need to compress wifi data, then it would indicate really horrible bandwidth. I normally wouldn't think of that as an issue, but then again I don't put thousands of active wifi devices together in a small area.

      I too am confused regarding the statement that they zip from one phone to another. I'm not even sure it is related to zip files or compression at all. Maybe it mean that it zaps from phone to phone multiple times until it reaches its destination, kind of like how lighting zaps around. That sentence is quite poorly written and would never have passed my quality control.

    4. Re:Technical inaccuracy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or they were using a common English word, not technical jargon.

      FFS, why do you jump to jargon?

    5. Re:Technical inaccuracy. by toQDuj · · Score: 1

      though if you are MS you "squirt" it. ... damn I'm old

      --
      Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
  11. London rioters would have loved it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A gang can burst on the scene and begin looting before the cops have a clue.

  12. Multipeer Connectivity and Friends by mbone · · Score: 3, Informative

    Firechat uses Apple's Multipeer connectivity for IOS, and a similar protocol for Android, to achieve a mesh network. I do not believe that any of this is MANET (the IETF's favorite mesh networking protocol).

  13. How does mesh network works? by godrik · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am no expert in mesh networking, but I was under the impression that addressing in them does not scale well. The best technique seems to be BATMAN [1]. AFAIU it requires everynode to perform a full broadcast regularly and that each device stores a complete routing table to each other device. That will not scale to build a city wide network.

    Somebody knows more?

    [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B....

    1. Re:How does mesh network works? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be a fun Computer Science problem to work on. I can think of a few "answers", but I'm not sure how well they would work in reality.

      You also have the problem of figuring out who the good guys from the bad guys are. Keeping the communications safe & free verses keeping the population safe. I would have a problem if this was used by evil people or Tea Partiers trying to overthrow the government... I do like the idea of free mesh internet access once you buy the equipment. I think that is the real reason the multi-mile wifi routers haven't been sold, because you could setup a local node, and access point mesh. Figure out the addressing issues by having some 'DNS servers' that can help get the route past the first few hops, and so you don't need to know who everyone is on the network. But, if you need to get a message out, the 'DNS servers' could send it to everyone connected. That is a vulnerability though.

      Maybe the program you run on your computer has a "phonebook" that it uses to look up any other computer or server. Any updates are pushed through, and only if you try to access that part of the network.

      Tor concept, but tweaked a little.

    2. Re:How does mesh network works? by asavage · · Score: 1

      I think some of the peer-to-peer software development might have solved this problem. the first generation peer to peer software all nodes were created equally creating massive traffic overheads. The second generation used the "super peer" model where high bandwidth nodes were connected to each other and most nodes connected with a super peer. With people moving around physically the mesh network becomes more complicated but when density is high like at a protest or sporting event a super peer network model would work really well and scale much better.

  14. it is only gonna get worse.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in hong kong.. just wait until the 50 year anniversary of the transfer of sovereignty gets nearer, after which point prc can totally dismantle 'one country, two systems'.. or whatever is left of it.. they did, after all, start fucking over hong kong as early as 2002-3 with article 23 and other changes.. there may not be much left by the time 2047 rolls around

  15. Democracies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Democracies should literally build their technology around mesh networks. Build everything off mesh something. Build everything around them and then take down all centralised systems and leave autocratic countries like China in the dark ages. Bitcoin is essentially mesh too. It's peer to peer.

    1. Re:Democracies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Independent of democracy, monarchy or anything else, you use the right tool for the job. There are loads of difficulties with mesh networks, like communication (what if there is no path between you and the other party?) and power consumption (relaying other people's messages isn't free, how do you keep it from running out of juice?). More importantly: why would the companies that make money under the current system allow their customers a chance to leave like that? Before you say "fuck them", remember they pay politicians for a reason so the government would not step in either.

      That said, projects like http://freifunk.net/en/ and http://buenosaireslibre.org/ exist.

  16. Was actually 99 or whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the transfer of sovereignity first happened. I had some friends there who mentioned it to me when it was happening. There was a ton of protesting when the transfer happened under the knowledge that if they didn't protest then China was going to steamroll these changes through right then and they'd lose all their freedoms. This is just the Hong Kong/Chinese equivalent of the State vs Federal rights BS going on in the US. I'd say the difference is that the HK citizens have more to lose, but I think that scale of justice is now precariously balanced on who is worse.

  17. Mesh networking at a local car parts store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The local Pep Boys uses the MANET Moe and Jack protocol.

  18. not just government shutdown by SYSS+Mouse · · Score: 1

    " many worry that the Chinese government would block local phone networks."

    The thing is the network can collapse by itself even without government action. Imagine Tens of thousands of phones concentrating in area.

  19. FireChat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like shouting "Fire" in a movie theater.

    I like that.

    Is it "Fire" as in "Run"
    or "Fire" as in "Take Aim, Fire."

    So lovely

  20. How many revolutions do we need people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Total CIA op written all over it.

    They got this down to a science of convincing young kids, paying some, training organizers and publicists on how to cover the events and what not to cover to overthrow governments they don't like. Fairly cheap, and little war.

  21. Is disrupting these networks not... by Red_Chaos1 · · Score: 1

    ...as simple as jamming all the frequencies? Jam the WiFi, jam the LTE, GSM, CDMA, whatever they use there. Boom. No more network. It only works because the people in power let it work, or are incompetent. Mesh networking isn't some immune savior of the people.