Wireless broadcasts everything on radio. Wired less so. I mean this for extremely local networks, i.e., a single building or city block. On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 19:52 +0100, Cari Machet wrote:
i will look at that
but what makes wired less "chatty"
can you expand your ideas on why wireless over wired/fiber?
if the interconnected reach problem goes away that is
+++
my issue with wire/fiber is that it is infrastructure built by the powers ... if higher levels of strength are on wireless networks - which my report discusses as coming - then maybe it is a better place to form new structures
the powers have proven they will lock them for capital as the chatanooga model demonstrates so i think it would be best to move from wire
and my point in bringing up syria and iraq wireless use as v strong signal in the middle of nowhere speaks to wireless ability as well so
i have no clue how they attianed this super connectivity and maybe the human body was sort of fucked by the waves floating in the air but still ... there could be built protection shields
i would like to see your arguments
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Ted Smith <tedks@riseup.net> wrote: I'm a little skeptical of wireless mesh networks as a general solution to this sort of problem, because they're inherently chatty, and have very limited reach.
I think a better solution is local wired networks with something like Freenet running over them providing distributed censorship-proof storage. The next challenge is to synchronize contents between local Freenet darknets over sneakernet, which I don't think has been done.
On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 16:06 +0100, Cari Machet wrote: > there are mesh networks > > > freifunk > > > https://duckduckgo.com/?q=freifunk+berlin > > > > also when people woke up to the cables of the net all going thru the > US there was at least talk of making new infrastructure on other land > masses > > > i wrote about the chatanooga model that freed the fiber under the city > of chatanooga and also the future being wireless hubs not > broadband ... look to what the powers are making frameworks for and > develop outside that realm using its flaws > > > when i lived in syria i had video calls in the middle of the > desert ... no cell towers in sight - > > > iraqis had video calling in 2000 or even 1999 - anyone that had an > efficient fone (nokia was big) > > > in other words the whole system is throttled and thats not just about > speed > > > but quantum computing development is being ignored ? > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> > wrote: > Posting 'useful' (your definition) older emails like this I > think is good. > > >> 4. The non-profit, open-source, volunteer internet > providing services > >> or products at no cost or for donations. > >> > >> 5. The closed sub-internets, mil-gov classified, SCADA, > restricted > >> and special purpose networks used by operators and > administrators of > >> backbones, nodes, satellite, cable, wired and wireless > systems, > >> > >> Second, the unknown internets, with or without evident > access logging: > >> > >> 6. The covert policing and spying internet which watches, > logs, > >> mucks around, runs stings, causes accidents and shut-downs, > cuts > >> cables, runs surprise tests and attacks, and keeps alive > the demand > >> for covert oversight of all the known others. > >> > >> 7. The covert internets which hide among all the others, or > try to > >> subject to discovery by 6. > >> > >> 8. The evanescent internets which are set up, used and > disappear > >> quickly, openly or covertly, subject to 6. > >> > >> 9. The wayward and waylaid internets which cannot be > identified: > >> rogues, experiments, mistakes, erratic systems, unexpected > >> glitches and consequences, acts of nature, forgotten > protocols, > >> inept code, destructive code, lost access techniques, death > >> of the perpetrators. > >> > >> 10. Internets of combinations, hybrids, deceptions, ploys > and > >> warfare among 1-9. > > We need a good name for the internet with these attributes: > - not so ad-hoc > - physical layer > - localised/ immediate neighbourhood area mini-nets > > - eventually (if useful) a meta network connecting these > > Since in general we don't own our internet tubes, the mostly > profit-motivated companies that do have ongoing economic > incentive to > centralize, control, be taken over by larger fish. > > We need to grok a counter-principle, such that we can over the > longer > term reverse this trend. > > This requires perhaps some perceivable benefit(s) to the local > neighbours and their phy nodes, to warrant the hour or so > required to > connect to each other. > > So where could such features/ benefits arise?: > - some new dynamic of torrents? > - local/ community "library" concept? > - privacy? > - anonymity? > > > > > -- > Cari Machet > NYC 646-436-7795 > carimachet@gmail.com > AIM carismachet > Syria +963-099 277 3243 > Amman +962 077 636 9407 > Berlin +49 152 11779219 > Reykjavik +354 894 8650 > Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> > > > 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 > > Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the > addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not > the > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this > information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email > without > permission is strictly prohibited. > > >
-- Sent from Ubuntu
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
-- Sent from Ubuntu