This thread is permanently archived
Alright, we need to make a new, underground internet.
| I understood the idea, but I did not understand how you will implement this
| the link layers are all controlled by the ISPs. It would never get off the ground
| An alternative would be HAM radio networks. But it has low data throughputs by what people expect today, comparable to what was available in the wired 80s.
In such a setting, a different mindset is needed. Data size is the most valuable and rare resource. It is quantifiable, the unit being the digital bit. The less you need to do something or to transmit, the better off you are. The mentality should be oriented towards sizes measured by decabytes and kilobytes, not gigabytes.
| Idiotic fluff should not exist, like flashy colours and bitmaps and all that high volume low information shit that dominates today. The smallest size should be the winner and ultimate goal. All research should go towards extreme compression mathematics and data transmissions should be heavily protocol based - aka highly structured and ideally never raw dumps. Anything not needed in the data should be dropped.
Only this mindset can be a starting point.
| There is also the idea of a decentralized internet. There are some people in chicago I think who make there own network with W-Lan Satellite Dishes. Right now I'm not sure if they provide their own internet, but they have build the infrastructure at least. Right now they still have to go through a isp to connect to the worldwide web but hey.
Theoretically we could also create our own decentralized internet through phones. Some HK young ppl have made a chatting app in this style.
| >>175641 I love the idea. There was a pre-internet in germany like that.
But its slow af. Too slow.
| A key concept to this is Shannon information theory regarding a finite transmission channel. Acording to that mathematical model, truely random data has potentially infinite data storage capacity, as the same dataset can be interpreted differently depending on how you interpret it. It only would need the right mathematical formula to interpret the data. Personally I consider Shannon one of the greatest minds humanity has ever given birth to.
| So if that was the case, data is only half of the story and the other half is interpretation mechanisms, or the encoders and decoders. A computer would be rated not by processor speeds and memory capacity, but mostly in its ability to decode data. An OS would be packed with codecs instead of compatibility layer dlls and textures.
CS would need to be a branch of mathematics instead of coding monkey mills in races who learns more swelled up programming languages.
| *cough* freenet *cough*
Distributed meshnet that you can submit sites to, somehow.
Don't know if it's still active tho
| What the fuck are you guys talking about i don't understand a single shit
| Question from a brainlet: How does TOR, Freenet, and I2P work? I had assumed a new internet would mean an entirely separate network, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
| >>176574
No it is not the case indeed. They are only anonymising techniques, adding another layer on top of existing infrastructure.
Building an alternate global connectivity infrastructure is a monumental task. Some solutions have been proposed but they mostly end up covering a very small area, resembling just another isolated lan.
A true solution would need to scale well in distance coverage. HAM radio does that and has the described drawbacks, which can be mitigated as above.
| I actually really like the idea of basic internet that is based on cellular networks
| or radio waves
| OP here.
So far, we have the HAM radio solution.
Can we get a list of pros and cons, and then a plausibility factor? Like how would we do this and how possible is it really?
| Regarding about data compression, in the past there is a .rar bomb, where the file is only 1kb, but when extracted, boom, it was above 1 tera or more(If i'm not wrong), rekting the pc and make it goes bluescreen. Is it possible to massively compress things like .rar bomb does?
>Note that i don't really know about these things
| This is awesome. We NEED a new internet.
| >>177035
The HAM radio community use it to communicate with each other. Think of it like a beefed up walkie talkie setup where you speak and and listen, communication happening in a radiowave channel. They all identify themselves by a number or a label.
Now, put a modem behind each radio and those talking points can exchange data.
The more such nodes there are, the better it will be. More comm channels would mean more parallell conversations.
1/2
| Just make a descentralised internet with privacy and add usenet
| 2/2
This is a very simplified description because of course there are some problems as well, like interferences and noise and whatnot. But then today there exist solutions and tech unavailable at the early stages, to minimise the negative thoughts effects, learned from the wifi world. Like frequency hopping and multichanel usage. There are solutions to most everything, what is lacking is dedication and of course... funding.
| That rar bomb was an exploit of a bug in rar decompressing algorithm. Yes, those kind are a problem. But then it is no difference than any kind of bugs there exist today as well. Like a pdf document with actually an exe file in it while it was not designed for that. They say you can even write a compiler in TeX and then the document, obviously with no sense in print, would act as the executable file.
| >>177069
Easy to say that I know. You have to start off from somewhere though, to "just make" that decentralised internet. I can do the usenet and many other cool stuff at the advanced stages, so help me with the first steps, like what medium to use for transmission of a simple bitstream and what hardware to use. And whose hardware will it be, mine, some private entity, public use access, etc.
| >>177075 I don’t know much about making a new internet infrastructure, but don’t use ham radio, we’re not using radio, just use an open source descentralized internet that focuses on privacy. iirc I think you need a license to use ham radio anyways
| >>177080
I do not understand what 'open source decentralised internet' means.
Yes, HAM radio needs a license and there is a sort of test about things an operator should now. But I see communication medium as a serious barrier to build a network of more than just an isolated lan. HAM radio is currently what I can think of that can fulfill that requirement. Please all sugest alternatives.
| >>177080 You don't just 'build' an internet, it is not something you just dump stuff on. It's a series of tubes, an interconnected network of computers where data flows from one point to another. Making a decentralized internet is even harder. It's like creating a mailing system with no post office.
| >>177142 I’m sure some autist could manage to figure out how to make an open sourced decentralized internet, just like how somebody managed to invent cryptocurrency from japan
| >>177144
You are not suggesting a mathematical formula implemented in computer code is at the same level, or world even, with the internet at large, are you? I can see it being comparable with Lempel Ziff Huffman compression or Fourier transformations of an infinite element series, but more than that is a bit of a stretch now.
I envy your schools and your teachers though.
| >>177144
Obviously it's not possible for some autistic person to create a new internet. Who would pay for the infrastructure?
@op : what BS has Europe and Asia to go through? Sim-hopping? It's not a thing.
The one thing starting to thread net neutrality are providers, limiting traffic (as they used to) but not limiting certain services.
| The problem is people see it as a good thing, because they can unlimitedly use SOME streaming service. But when your ISP controls what content you view because of limitations this will be a huge problem.
| >>177178
Because a lot of people do not know what the internet is. They see it as the www and that is it, while it really is much simpler and vast: digital connectivity to a network that spans across all the planet and the protocols that make possible bits from random point A to reach another random point B.
Ignorance is the mother of all Evil.
| >>177177 OP here, and really, Simhopping is not a thing? Not that I don't believe you, but would you mind proving that to me somehow? I am 100% okay with being proven wrong as, since I'm American, I've never actually been and therefore I've never seen it myself. However, many American media sources report that India and China as well as parts of Russia and Germany resort to Simhopping as a method to reduce internet bills. I will accept any credible evidence you can provide, thanks.
| >>177144 I believe what>>551e12 was trying to ask was, what exactly do you mean by a "Open sourced decentralized internet". Define the term so that we all clearly understand what you exactly mean.
| >>177042
Mentioning on compressing to incredible extremes, I forgot to comment on that.
Well, it all depends on the data itself. A petabyte of zeroes, yes, it can be compressed to a few kilobytes. All you store is a formula: "repeat zeroes 10^15 times." If it is with a 1 every 5 bits, the formula would reflect that too. The rule is, the more not random is the data, the more it can be compressed for the discovered patterns can be transformed to formulas occupying less space.
1/2
| >>177186 I couldn't agree more, although my agreeance with you implies my own hypocrisy, because I'm not ashamed to admit that I am pretty damn ignorant to the inner workings and complexities of the World Wide Web. However, I would be willing to learn and assist if we could actually form some sort of plan to make a second internet. Frankly I wasn't asking to formulate a real-world plan, moreso to see what people would respons with; to see creative solutions to this problem.
| However, I will also say that, while I wouldn't really have a usage for some underground internet myself, I do advocate for basic human freedoms (Not in an SJW way, but in a common sense way) and I don't like the idea of an admittedly fantastical but scarily realistic future where corporations are allowed to say what information we have do and don't have access to. A world where the rich are the only ones allowed to self-educate using the internet is a bleak one indeed.
| 2/2
The more random is the data, the less it is possible to compress it. There is no pattern in random data, the data becomes its own decompressing formula.
That is what compression algorithms do, find patterns and store the formulas that describe the data instead of the data itself. That is why higher compression rates require more time and more processing power to be performed. Some of them do multiple passes on the data.
Its why encrypted volumes can NOT be compressed.
| Any encryption solution whose encrypted data can be compressed is a lie. Always.
| >>177193
In simple terms, www is one of technologies built upon the internet. It is roughly webservers and web browsers, or web clients. These take for granted a lot of things: physical connections, layer 2 communication (switch to switch), layer 3 (router to router), protocols to decide path resolution between two points (RIP, OSPF, BGP, you see a bit of this as the 'default gateway'), DNS, ICMP. And on top of all this you can then have www. And ftp. And ssh. And skype. And all.
| >>177205 So, in that case, what applications would HAM radio have for the same purposes? There would be obvious barricades, but could we actually configure a HAM radio to work under similar layers of this kind?
| Is it possible to at least operte old DOS computers using HAM radios as routers?
| this is a really cool idea, but wouldn't it be really slow?
| >>177270 From what I think I am starting to understand, (and I could be wrong here), it would be really slow if we tried using today's systems on it, since the majority of our systems use so much memory that they just couldn't work over HAM transmissions. However, if we took out anything that wasn't essential and stripped it down to the bare minimums, and THEN compressed it to SHIT to the point where your "OS" is only a few kilobytes...then we could possibly make this work.
| No, we don't.
| >>177319 You’re one of them smartphne using normies that would easily give away their freedoms and privacy, you’re part of the cancer
| >>177248
It is possible to start using the radiowaves as a long distance wifi. And then the other layers on top of it would be more or less the same. Wifi is a L2 transport, like switches are. So in the mental model, whenever today you have switches an wifi, you would have a HAM radio transmitter/receiver. Similar to radiolink bridges. On top of that, starting from [tcp|udp]/ip and upwards, things could remain even the same.
1/2
| 2/2
Of course some changes would make sense as compared to wifi. Wifi has a central structure with the AP at the center coordinating channel frequency, retransmission of dropped wifi frames, collisions, interference avoidance, etc. In HAM radio I would think there is no central AP like entity, so the nearest peers would negotiate comm channels directly, in a mesh structure. Much like routers do with BGP or torrent peers do, or cellular network smsc find each other.
| >>177278
Well, a start to tackle the problem would be imagining today that you are connected via a low throughput connection and start solving all communication needs with that limit in mind. Computers could be as they are, locally you can process data as you like and be as fancy as you will. But when sending out data, that is when you squeeze as much as possible. Software would have to take it into account.
1/2
| 2/2
Like, a server sends a webpage to a browser, it sends content and menu structure numerically and labeled, but rendering it graphically or with eyecandy the browser can do it locally as it pleases. Today we send the images and the ccs and the styling across the wires. This either will have to be dropped, or changed, to be done like Xwindow has it, sending heavyly coded instructions which the client reinterprets. Similar to how bmp or jpg differ from svg or .ai files.
| This site for example is way faster and uses a fraction of the bandwidth to load compared to your usual wordpress site. Because it is text based and stripped of graphics. Now add to this also the ability of the server to send the final html to be rendered code heavily compressed too. The client will first decompress and then render it.
The OS itself does not need to be small or stripped down. The important bit is how it communicates with some other point.
| So the communicating points should find ways to comunicate with each other by exchanging the less information as possible and have preset rules of how to do that. Aka use compression codecs for anything.
Example: I write here the number 128. It is three characters one two eight. Three text mode bytes, say 48 bits (3*16). As a number it is 8 bits. It is best for the text '128' to be sent as the number and then be rendered as text again when received. What %s and %d of printf().
| So in overall, what has led to today's swell of data usage, is lazyness/comfort of producing something without thinking much of the resources used. Because people do not see them it does not mean they are not there used and abused. Websites and desktop software are the worst offenders. While in embedded systems and resource constraint environments we already have incredible small sizes. Because it was designed carefully and properly.
| I just thought right now of how ridiculous it has become the size of a graphic card driver installer package. Around 200M of data only to have some dlls placed in the OS which intercept the calls from variuous programs and forwards these to the hardware and then the computed result to forward it back fo the program. The installer has those cool images in it, those fancy animated menus, is programmed in .net and to transfer 30MB of what you will use is needed a 200MB vessel!
| >>177628 ...Wow. I had absolutely no idea how much went into data transference. That is really eye opening and actually makes a lot of sense.
So essentially if I'm getting this, in order to rationally and plausibly use HAM radio as an international data transference system similar to the internet, we would need to trim everything that isn't absolutely necessary so that ONLY the essentials are there.
Wow. The internet's form of tiny house living, I suppose.
| So then, what would take the place of servers? How would that part of it work?
| >>178099
Servers could remain servers. True, the data HAS TO physically be somewhere. P2p use each user computer, it relies on the honesty of users to allow uploads as well as downloads. While the dominant scheme is with some server holding the content. That we dont care where the servers are doesnt mean they are not there. Which is better is debatable, it depends on the peoples mindset and how they think, individual priority or collective conscious. I cant say.
| In austria, there's a small project where the users need to install a mininature server with their router, and then you should be able to get through the internet using connection inbetween those who also use the system.
The more users there are, the faster it gets. And the best part? No large ISP is really in control of it.
| That certainly sounds a lot easier to implement than rebuilding everything up with HAM radio. >>178812
| >>178881
It's basically a ploy to seriously decrease internet prices, because no major profit company looms over it.
| >>178812 I am curious. Can you tell more of this please? Or is there where I can look for more detail?
| Is anybody gonna make an attempt at any of this or are we just spitballing
| Amateur/HAM radio is unsuitable, regulations disallow encrypted communications over HAM frequencies. If anything, strong crypto is essential for a new internet.
| >179566
Pretty sure depends on whawre you live, in the US, as far as I know the FCC pretty much has given up on radio frequencies. Though again I live in the middle of no where
| Someone on /g/ was talking about the next step being personal internets, like how there was a big step from public big expensive computers to cheaper accessible PCs, personal computers. He was talking more about literally running a cable in your neighborhood to create a network for the people in those houses, a LAN basically i guess but private, personal and independent of the current internet.
| >>179843
Moving from a mainframe & work station to a desktop is pretty different to running network lines through a neighborhood. .
Unless your talking about stringing category cable between fences you start getting into Civic regulations and federal regulations.
Most private/personal WAN's people talk about are done with wireless nodes or some of the crazier ones have used microwave stations. And you still need to manage the routing & switching inside and between private networks
This thread is permanently archived
| So if I'm being honest, I'm an ignorant American. I have only recently started paying attention to a lot of the other BS that EU and Asia have to go through to get good, fair internet access. I mean, "Sim-hopping" already sounds really fucking cyberpunk.
But with the recent American upsets over Net Neutrality, many people are claiming it is the curtain call for the free internet before corps cyberpunk shit up.
Thus, we need a new internet, one only we can access. Anybody in?