Please wait...
From the NSA's point of view, there's no difference between a tiny homebrew
computer and a 64-core MegaDoomDestroyer. They can break the best encryption
in real time. Being invisible to the authorities is a whole different problem
space. Right now we're talking about building a medium that has no single
point of failure to choke, so it cannot be silenced by SJW's, and gains enough
traction that people outside of our tribe actually use it.
First, it has to gain traction. You will know it has succeeded at this when Wikipedia labels it a white supremacist network.
Then, it has to gain critical mass. You will know it has succeeded at this when Wikipedia labels it as a technology used for child trafficking and other horrible crimes against humanity.
Finally, it has to become ubiquitous. You will know it has succeeded at this when no one cares what Wikipedia says about it.
First, it has to gain traction. You will know it has succeeded at this when Wikipedia labels it a white supremacist network.
Then, it has to gain critical mass. You will know it has succeeded at this when Wikipedia labels it as a technology used for child trafficking and other horrible crimes against humanity.
Finally, it has to become ubiquitous. You will know it has succeeded at this when no one cares what Wikipedia says about it.
Fri Jul 12 2019 13:18:07 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored
Finally, it has to become ubiquitous. You will know it has succeeded at this when no one cares what Wikipedia says about it.
Heh. I loved this post. :)
I mean, I agree with it, too.
I just had a thought about Citadel and sidenets.
Mastodon uses existing federation protocols to allow anyone to "follow" anyone on any server. As I've said before, it would be pretty easy to add these protocols to Citadel, to allow users to participate in the fediverse on a user-by-user level.
But what if the entity being followed was not a user, but a room? What if anyone on any server could, for example, follow "@IGnet_Unlimited@uncensored.citadel.org" and this very room would appear in their feed? And if they left comments on posts, they would show up right here in the room?
Obviously we'd also have to add another mode to participate in remote feeds, as a follower.
This would be a different model than the one we've had in the past, but it would *appear* the same to end users. The older model was built on replication, similar to UseNet, because 30+ years ago most of the world relied on moving data around in batches on slow dialup connections.
Today we have everything connected in real time. The federated Mastodon model, if I understand it correctly, builds your feed by connecting to the servers on which the people you're following are hosted.
So in a Citadel-Mastodon model, every room would have a "home server" rather than replicating every room to every host.
By the way, this is *exactly* how Facebook (the worst thing our world has ever experienced) works. Your profile and "wall" are stored on a server close to where they think you are. When someone "friends" you, your posts are fetched from your home server, censored of wrongthink, and fed to your friend's feed.
Mastodon uses existing federation protocols to allow anyone to "follow" anyone on any server. As I've said before, it would be pretty easy to add these protocols to Citadel, to allow users to participate in the fediverse on a user-by-user level.
But what if the entity being followed was not a user, but a room? What if anyone on any server could, for example, follow "@IGnet_Unlimited@uncensored.citadel.org" and this very room would appear in their feed? And if they left comments on posts, they would show up right here in the room?
Obviously we'd also have to add another mode to participate in remote feeds, as a follower.
This would be a different model than the one we've had in the past, but it would *appear* the same to end users. The older model was built on replication, similar to UseNet, because 30+ years ago most of the world relied on moving data around in batches on slow dialup connections.
Today we have everything connected in real time. The federated Mastodon model, if I understand it correctly, builds your feed by connecting to the servers on which the people you're following are hosted.
So in a Citadel-Mastodon model, every room would have a "home server" rather than replicating every room to every host.
By the way, this is *exactly* how Facebook (the worst thing our world has ever experienced) works. Your profile and "wall" are stored on a server close to where they think you are. When someone "friends" you, your posts are fetched from your home server, censored of wrongthink, and fed to your friend's feed.
Thu Jul 25 2019 13:49:52 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ UncensoredI just had a thought about Citadel and sidenets.
Mastodon uses existing federation protocols to allow anyone to "follow" anyone on any server. As I've said before, it would be pretty easy to add these protocols to Citadel, to allow users to participate in the fediverse on a user-by-user level.
But what if the entity being followed was not a user, but a room? What if anyone on any server could, for example, follow "@IGnet_Unlimited@uncensored.citadel.org" and this very room would appear in their feed? And if they left comments on posts, they would show up right here in the room?
Obviously we'd also have to add another mode to participate in remote feeds, as a follower.
This would be a different model than the one we've had in the past, but it would *appear* the same to end users. The older model was built on replication, similar to UseNet, because 30+ years ago most of the world relied on moving data around in batches on slow dialup connections.
Today we have everything connected in real time. The federated Mastodon model, if I understand it correctly, builds your feed by connecting to the servers on which the people you're following are hosted.
So in a Citadel-Mastodon model, every room would have a "home server" rather than replicating every room to every host.
By the way, this is *exactly* how Facebook (the worst thing our world has ever experienced) works. Your profile and "wall" are stored on a server close to where they think you are. When someone "friends" you, your posts are fetched from your home server, censored of wrongthink, and fed to your friend's feed.
This sounds like it would do exactly the trick we are talking about. I don't necessarily want to feed EVERY room on Uncensored, nor store every message from every Citadel server I join membership with - but allowing my Citadel to *apparently* share feeds with other rooms on other Citadels, would be excellent.
Would it be bidirectional? If I set this up to share a room from Uncensored on The Sanitarium, would my users be able to post - and would it be stored locally on mine and inserted in your rooms feed, or would it be posted and stored on yours?
Either way - it sounds awesome.
It would *look* bidirectional. I haven't worked out the details yet, but
in a perfect world, you'd see a "virtual" room that is actually just a view
of some remote server. That remote server might be another Citadel or it
could be a feed from any other node in the fediverse. I could easily envision
these being either shared (so they appear in everyone's march list) or private
(so they only appear in your own march list).
There are a lot of steps ahead to get there, but a vision is starting to appear. I'll give you access to the development room so you can see what I'm going to do first.
There are a lot of steps ahead to get there, but a vision is starting to appear. I'll give you access to the development room so you can see what I'm going to do first.
2019-08-30 06:44 from nonservator
"Just build your own Internet!" they sneered. Well, it's gonna come
to that.
Actually, there are cities where neighbours are building their whole networks and becoming their own ISPs.
There is a big one in Spain. They basically let you join as long as you bring your own equipment for linking in. I have heard it covers a big area already.
Community access ISPs sound great, and I'd love to be part of one. I would
imagine, though, that their goal is to provide a link to the public Internet
rather than to have their own network out of view of the mainstream. At some
point it has to uplink to the rest of the world.
I was absent, I am back. I'll try to be more attentive. I'd like to be
part of this, still.
Of course. It's going to happen but everyone has to be patient -- we are some time away from working code.
I've been wishing for this for a long time. Have every router have a P2P
connection to the next neighbor's Wifi hotspot... in a city like Phoenix,
you could have coverage from one end of the valley to the other without *ever*
hopping on the public network.
2019-09-04 12:34 from IGnatius T Foobar
Community access ISPs sound great, and I'd love to be part of one. I
would imagine, though, that their goal is to provide a link to the
public Internet rather than to have their own network out of view of
the mainstream. At some point it has to uplink to the rest of the
world.
Yeah, I think they prety much work as a traditional ISP there. They probably crowdsourced an ASN and have one or two uplinks to traditional telecomms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guifi.net
"Since early 2011, guifi.net is connected to the Catalonia Neutral Internet Exchange Point (CATNIX)"
"Since early 2011, guifi.net is connected to the Catalonia Neutral Internet Exchange Point (CATNIX)"
If you explore guifi's web presence, you start seeing a lot of things like
http://guifi.net/node/1234/blah/blah/blah.html
That looks a lot like a peer-to-peer network with a web proxy sitting in front of it at the network edge. So I'm going to *guess* that they are maintaining a private network with CGN sitting in front of it, and then they have that proxy system for anyone who wants to establish a web presence from their location.
http://guifi.net/node/1234/blah/blah/blah.html
That looks a lot like a peer-to-peer network with a web proxy sitting in front of it at the network edge. So I'm going to *guess* that they are maintaining a private network with CGN sitting in front of it, and then they have that proxy system for anyone who wants to establish a web presence from their location.
Hmm I had not investigated that deep.
It looks like lots of small providers are jumping in the CGN without ASN nor anything bandwagon. If they had an ipv6 stack that would be even ok but most have not :(
Thanks for looking into it :)
It looks like lots of small providers are jumping in the CGN without ASN nor anything bandwagon. If they had an ipv6 stack that would be even ok but most have not :(
Thanks for looking into it :)
In some parts of the world (particularly Asia) it's very common for consumer-grade
Internet to [24~[service to be sitting behind a massive CGN. There's even
a dedicated IPv4 block for providers to use for CGN, so it doesn't conflict
with anyone's private networks (100.64.0.0/10).
On the newest networks, this is starting to be supplanted by setups involving IPv6. For example, on the T-Mobile network, my device has a native IPv6 address, and uses NAT464 to get to the IPv4 Internet.
And that's how IPv6 will roll out, not with Deering and Hinden standing on a battleship declaring "Mission Accomplished", but instead we'll gradually start to realize that everyone has it. At that point the IPv6-only web sites and cloud services will start to appear, and then IPv4 will start to disappear at around the same speed IPX did when everyone first got IPv4.
On the newest networks, this is starting to be supplanted by setups involving IPv6. For example, on the T-Mobile network, my device has a native IPv6 address, and uses NAT464 to get to the IPv4 Internet.
And that's how IPv6 will roll out, not with Deering and Hinden standing on a battleship declaring "Mission Accomplished", but instead we'll gradually start to realize that everyone has it. At that point the IPv6-only web sites and cloud services will start to appear, and then IPv4 will start to disappear at around the same speed IPX did when everyone first got IPv4.
Thu Jul 25 2019 13:49:52 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ UncensoredI just had a thought about Citadel and sidenets.
Mastodon uses existing federation protocols to allow anyone to "follow" anyone on any server. As I've said before, it would be pretty easy to add these protocols to Citadel, to allow users to participate in the fediverse on a user-by-user level.
But what if the entity being followed was not a user, but a room? What if anyone on any server could, for example, follow "@IGnet_Unlimited@uncensored.citadel.org" and this very room would appear in their feed? And if they left comments on posts, they would show up right here in the room?
Obviously we'd also have to add another mode to participate in remote feeds, as a follower.
This would be a different model than the one we've had in the past, but it would *appear* the same to end users. The older model was built on replication, similar to UseNet, because 30+ years ago most of the world relied on moving data around in batches on slow dialup connections.
Today we have everything connected in real time. The federated Mastodon model, if I understand it correctly, builds your feed by connecting to the servers on which the people you're following are hosted.
So in a Citadel-Mastodon model, every room would have a "home server" rather than replicating every room to every host.
By the way, this is *exactly* how Facebook (the worst thing our world has ever experienced) works. Your profile and "wall" are stored on a server close to where they think you are. When someone "friends" you, your posts are fetched from your home server, censored of wrongthink, and fed to your friend's feed.
You originally had the port 504 setup for replication using multiple nodes.
I recognized a few bits about how that worked and deployed several Citadel nodes on a massive wifi network deployed across 6000km2 of Papua.
It is still a fond memory of how we could share email and posts from tarpaulin camps in the jungle back to civilization, using Citadel.
The network actually saved lives.
The issue of bandwidth for relaying data that might never be asked for was one thing I noticed as a cost, amongst other points,
The other much more serious issue is using ip4 addresses - I live and work in realms seriously hostile to free thought.
Having a mesh such as Briar or Firegarden or whatever might get past normal blockage. very Not yet ready.
Eventually I chatted with the guys at https://blog.althea.net/ who seem to have found a way to get meshes to pay for bandwidth costs, somewhat.
Unfortunately they seem to have sold their souls to Eth and all that, so they will eventually get owned by some banksters somewhere.
Until just a few of weeks ago I have been too busy to keep up,
but I know far too many locales where such mesh networks would be wildly popular.
At one point I considered setting up a Citadel on an i2p network which could then be gatewayed, much as IPFS is,
which could go some distance to skipping over locales that have issues.
In such a use case,
the concept of relaying subscribed Rooms becomes an intriguing idea.
I did code a p2p method for instantaneous payments for access, which requires zero financial gateway nonsense.
Cheers
back to lurk mode
https://uncensored.citadel.org/dotgoto?room=Trashcan