[Fwd: Multiple Internets]
tedks at riseup.net
Wed Feb 10 09:02:57 PST 2016
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
> 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
> 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
> but quantum computing development is being ignored ?
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net>
> 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,
> >> and special purpose networks used by operators and
> administrators of
> >> backbones, nodes, satellite, cable, wired and wireless
> >> Second, the unknown internets, with or without evident
> access logging:
> >> 6. The covert policing and spying internet which watches,
> >> mucks around, runs stings, causes accidents and shut-downs,
> >> 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
> >> quickly, openly or covertly, subject to 6.
> >> 9. The wayward and waylaid internets which cannot be
> >> rogues, experiments, mistakes, erratic systems, unexpected
> >> glitches and consequences, acts of nature, forgotten
> >> inept code, destructive code, lost access techniques, death
> >> of the perpetrators.
> >> 10. Internets of combinations, hybrids, deceptions, ploys
> >> 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
> 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 at 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
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this
> information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email
> permission is strictly prohibited.
Sent from Ubuntu
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the cypherpunks