6 ms·

“The Dream of Internet Freedom Is Dying”

136 points by chris-at 11y ago

sandworm101 11y ago
I would add that the "Secret law" also encompasses the private deals struck between various organizations that have the full force and effect of law. For instance, I am often asked about the standards for DMCA takedowns and monitoring of content. I cannot turn to laws and cases. I have to glean information from patterns of activity. Youtube does X, and the MPAA aren't screaming mad about Youtube these days, so perhaps we also need to do X. Or, megaupload was doing X Y and Z. But a dozen other website were doing X and Y without a peep from US authorities. So I guess Z is the touchstone even though Z isn't mentioned anywhere in any law or case and wasn't even around when the laws were written.
- ikeboy 11y ago
  Youtube spent several years fighting a lawsuit against Viacom until they settled last year. If whoever you're giving advice to doesn't have Google's cash to defend themselves, don't tell them to copy Youtube's actions.
  - sandworm101 11y ago
    My advice goes one step further: Don't do user generated content without an ejection plan, a means to extract all the money and shut the doors instantly should you catch the eye of the mpaa or their ilk.
jackgavigan 11y ago
It's ironic to read about Granick advocating a free, open and decentralised Internet the same day we've been discussing how we're heading Straight for AOL 2.0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10008769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10008769 The writing's on the wall.
- NovaS1X 11y ago
  The writing has been there for a while but many are too distracted to stop and read.
faragon 11y ago
The dream could come back. In my opinion. Defeating legal threats: - Design server architecture so can be migrated from one country to a different one without censorship. Now is easy, with VPSs, you can move infrastructure in few hours, if you do automated deployment. Defeating cost threats ("run your own software like a 'megacorp' "): - Services running on cheap hardware handling 10-100x more users per server than current high language implementations (back to CGIs/Fast-CGIs on native code, instead of PHP/.NET/Java/NodeJS/Python/Perl). - Filesystem-less storage (start server, load filesystem to optimized in-process RAM DB), so following steps can be avoided: disk cache, filesystem tree search, multiple memory copies, etc. - Separate persistent and non-persistent data, so most operations don't need to hit the disk. - Abstraction over those low-level systems so people with high-level capacitation can build a massive-scale web application.
- beagle3 11y ago
  Two points I disagree with: > - Services running on cheap hardware handling 10-100x more users per server than current high language implementations (back to CGIs/Fast-CGIs on native code, instead of PHP/.NET/Java/NodeJS/Python/Perl). CGIs are slow even with native code, in the vast majority of cases, and FastCGIs are fast enough with properly written Python/Perl. Further, properly written Java or .NET, and even NodeJS performs well enough these days that unless you have some extreme case (you don't), you shouldn't even think about native. The tradeoff in bugs and dev time is just not worth it. > - Abstraction over those low-level systems so people with high-level capacitation can build a massive-scale web application. With incredibly consistent and repeatable correlation, abstractions over those low level system cost a lot in performance, thus contradicting your earlier points.
  - faragon 11y ago
    > are slow even with native code, in the vast majority of cases, and FastCGIs are fast enough with properly written Python/Perl. (...) Yes, CGIs are slow because of the process spawn. About FastCGIs, if you want 10-100x throughput increase with same hardware, you have to go to a lower level. That's the tradeoff. I.e. properly written in native vs properly written in high level language. > The tradeoff in bugs and dev time is just not worth it. The tradeoff in bugs and dev time can be solved/increased with a higher level abstraction, e.g. using high level libraries, so the developer could avoid risks. > With incredibly consistent and repeatable correlation, abstractions over those low level system cost a lot in performance, thus contradicting your earlier points. No, if the abstraction is in the same low level language, e.g. using high level libraries on lower-level languages. In the end, higher level languages solve memory management, string handling, rich library, etc. With good libraries, C/C++/Others can be safer and as simple as e.g. NodeJS.
unicornporn 11y ago
Has anybody found the speech?
- hyperion_ 11y ago
  Probably won't be out until whenever they decide to release this years talks on YouTube.
rconti 11y ago
Apparently the Black Hat audience is very conservative and pro-government. And likes Keith Alexander. I guess the author has been attending a different conference than me.
- sandworm101 11y ago
  Perhaps attendees there as spies now outnumber actual enthusiasts. Perhaps they can now spy on each other and leave the rest of us alone.
skylan_q 11y ago
We've been helping to kill that dream when we pushed for net neutrality. We played right into it. Getting to the circus on time (i.e. watching king of thrones after torrenting it) was so important we had to hand over the Internet to the FCC. We no longer route around the damage. We intend damage.
eevilspock 11y ago
Wu users need to also accept responsibility. We handed over control to "Facebook, Twitter, GMail, Amazon, etc" as part of our Faustian bargain to get everything for free and put advertisers in the drivers seat. The invisible hand works for the customers, not the products.
- beeforpork 11y ago
  Dvorak keyboard?
jokoon 11y ago
I don't have the energy nor the motivation, but I would really love to make a p2p internet which could be as easy to use as bittorrent. Of course security is a problem, but I'm sure that making things public by default would make it easier, and security is not always mandatory, you can always use something which isnt entirely secure and use it well within its limits.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  http://ipfs.io/ http://ipfs.io/
floopidydoopidy 11y ago
I think it's a side effect of the eternal September. There was a time in my life when I had to convince people that email was important. Now, it's old news and even the slowest adopters have seen the light provided by the internet. One day, someone will invent something cooler than the internet, and no one but the super technically minded will use it, and it will be a new spring. But September will still be a few months away.
zkhalique 11y ago
Publishing has been decentralized by the web. Communication has been decentralized by email. Money and contracts has been decentralized with bitcoin. Social hasn't yet been effectively decentralized, but it will be. Decentralized is better when it comes to individual choice, curbing abuse of power, and resilience (no single points of failure). But it's way worse when it comes to security. And no one's been able to decentralize security effectively yet, because a single top-down entity with an economy of scale has more resources to secure itself than expecting EVERY little host and their dog to upgrade to the latest version of Wordpress.
- austenallred 11y ago
  generally it's worse for UX as well
- adventured 11y ago
  Social has been decentralized. I socialize with friends across a dozen digital platforms now. Email, phone calls, SMS, WhatsApp/Viber/Kik/Snapchat, Facebook, Skype, Twitter. Then throw in a dozen other communities, ranging from Hacker News, to Stack Overflow, to Reddit or Imgur, and so on. Social has been substantially decentralized. The only way it can be argued that it hasn't, is if you consider any corporate ownership of a platform to be by default non-decentralization (as opposed to having numerous available platforms being the decentralizing aspect).
  - knieveltech 11y ago
    Email - logged and retained by service provider. Phone calls - tappable, metadata logged and retained by service provider. SMS - logged and retained by service provider. Skype - activity logged and retained by service provider. Twitter - activity logged and retained by service provider. You were saying something about decentralization?
    - pekk 11y ago
      It's not all that easy or cheap to decentralize the last mile. Things were not any more decentralized when most people used dialup, and they were definitely more centralized when the main users of the internet were on a few campuses.
bitL 11y ago
I've just had a simple idea while thinking about the conflict between privacy, freedom, law and democracy and its effect on the Internet. How about designing a new set of protocols that would be using the highest degree of available cryptography and obfuscation, minimizing leaking of traceable information, but having a democratic voting mechanism in its core (Paxos-style?) for "de-privacing" sources of information/traffic shall the majority of users decide (in cases clearly violating laws in grave matters etc.)? Direct democracy-style. How much of a pipe-dream would that be? What would be deficiencies of this approach and how could they be addressed? Is this even technically doable in a de-centralized fashion? Would apathy or malice of general population be the main risk? The motivation is that nobody would like to have all their private matters out in the open (which is a fact nowadays), but we need an efficient way to enforce reasonable laws (like preventing child abuse, selling hard drugs, illegal arms etc).
- syense 11y ago
  i think the main risk is mob mentality, especially polarizing stories could result in essentially innocent people having their private lives laid bare over sensationalist stories. you could, i suppose, couple the idea with a republican idea of senate to dampen that effect, but i suspect it wouldnt work.
- Zigurd 11y ago
  > but we need an efficient way to enforce reasonable laws (like preventing child abuse, selling hard drugs, illegal arms etc). We have that. All those crimes take place in meatspace. Which is where the police exist, too. Tell the police to do their jobs and detect actual crime, not thought-crime.

136 points by chris-at 11y ago

I would add that the "Secret law" also encompasses the private deals struck between various organizations that have the full force and effect of law. For instance, I am often asked about the standards for DMCA takedowns and monitoring of content. I cannot turn to laws and cases. I have to glean information from patterns of activity. Youtube does X, and the MPAA aren't screaming mad about Youtube these days, so perhaps we also need to do X. Or, megaupload was doing X Y and Z. But a dozen other website were doing X and Y without a peep from US authorities. So I guess Z is the touchstone even though Z isn't mentioned anywhere in any law or case and wasn't even around when the laws were written.

ikeboy 11y ago
Youtube spent several years fighting a lawsuit against Viacom until they settled last year. If whoever you're giving advice to doesn't have Google's cash to defend themselves, don't tell them to copy Youtube's actions.
- sandworm101 11y ago
  My advice goes one step further: Don't do user generated content without an ejection plan, a means to extract all the money and shut the doors instantly should you catch the eye of the mpaa or their ilk.

jackgavigan 11y ago

It's ironic to read about Granick advocating a free, open and decentralised Internet the same day we've been discussing how we're heading Straight for AOL 2.0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10008769 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10008769 The writing's on the wall.

NovaS1X 11y ago
The writing has been there for a while but many are too distracted to stop and read.

faragon 11y ago

The dream could come back. In my opinion. Defeating legal threats: - Design server architecture so can be migrated from one country to a different one without censorship. Now is easy, with VPSs, you can move infrastructure in few hours, if you do automated deployment. Defeating cost threats ("run your own software like a 'megacorp' "): - Services running on cheap hardware handling 10-100x more users per server than current high language implementations (back to CGIs/Fast-CGIs on native code, instead of PHP/.NET/Java/NodeJS/Python/Perl). - Filesystem-less storage (start server, load filesystem to optimized in-process RAM DB), so following steps can be avoided: disk cache, filesystem tree search, multiple memory copies, etc. - Separate persistent and non-persistent data, so most operations don't need to hit the disk. - Abstraction over those low-level systems so people with high-level capacitation can build a massive-scale web application.

beagle3 11y ago
Two points I disagree with: > - Services running on cheap hardware handling 10-100x more users per server than current high language implementations (back to CGIs/Fast-CGIs on native code, instead of PHP/.NET/Java/NodeJS/Python/Perl). CGIs are slow even with native code, in the vast majority of cases, and FastCGIs are fast enough with properly written Python/Perl. Further, properly written Java or .NET, and even NodeJS performs well enough these days that unless you have some extreme case (you don't), you shouldn't even think about native. The tradeoff in bugs and dev time is just not worth it. > - Abstraction over those low-level systems so people with high-level capacitation can build a massive-scale web application. With incredibly consistent and repeatable correlation, abstractions over those low level system cost a lot in performance, thus contradicting your earlier points.
- faragon 11y ago
  > are slow even with native code, in the vast majority of cases, and FastCGIs are fast enough with properly written Python/Perl. (...) Yes, CGIs are slow because of the process spawn. About FastCGIs, if you want 10-100x throughput increase with same hardware, you have to go to a lower level. That's the tradeoff. I.e. properly written in native vs properly written in high level language. > The tradeoff in bugs and dev time is just not worth it. The tradeoff in bugs and dev time can be solved/increased with a higher level abstraction, e.g. using high level libraries, so the developer could avoid risks. > With incredibly consistent and repeatable correlation, abstractions over those low level system cost a lot in performance, thus contradicting your earlier points. No, if the abstraction is in the same low level language, e.g. using high level libraries on lower-level languages. In the end, higher level languages solve memory management, string handling, rich library, etc. With good libraries, C/C++/Others can be safer and as simple as e.g. NodeJS.

unicornporn 11y ago

Has anybody found the speech?

hyperion_ 11y ago
Probably won't be out until whenever they decide to release this years talks on YouTube.

rconti 11y ago

Apparently the Black Hat audience is very conservative and pro-government. And likes Keith Alexander. I guess the author has been attending a different conference than me.

sandworm101 11y ago
Perhaps attendees there as spies now outnumber actual enthusiasts. Perhaps they can now spy on each other and leave the rest of us alone.

skylan_q 11y ago

We've been helping to kill that dream when we pushed for net neutrality. We played right into it. Getting to the circus on time (i.e. watching king of thrones after torrenting it) was so important we had to hand over the Internet to the FCC. We no longer route around the damage. We intend damage.

eevilspock 11y ago

Wu users need to also accept responsibility. We handed over control to "Facebook, Twitter, GMail, Amazon, etc" as part of our Faustian bargain to get everything for free and put advertisers in the drivers seat. The invisible hand works for the customers, not the products.

beeforpork 11y ago
Dvorak keyboard?

jokoon 11y ago

I don't have the energy nor the motivation, but I would really love to make a p2p internet which could be as easy to use as bittorrent. Of course security is a problem, but I'm sure that making things public by default would make it easier, and security is not always mandatory, you can always use something which isnt entirely secure and use it well within its limits.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
http://ipfs.io/ http://ipfs.io/

floopidydoopidy 11y ago

I think it's a side effect of the eternal September. There was a time in my life when I had to convince people that email was important. Now, it's old news and even the slowest adopters have seen the light provided by the internet. One day, someone will invent something cooler than the internet, and no one but the super technically minded will use it, and it will be a new spring. But September will still be a few months away.

zkhalique 11y ago

Publishing has been decentralized by the web. Communication has been decentralized by email. Money and contracts has been decentralized with bitcoin. Social hasn't yet been effectively decentralized, but it will be. Decentralized is better when it comes to individual choice, curbing abuse of power, and resilience (no single points of failure). But it's way worse when it comes to security. And no one's been able to decentralize security effectively yet, because a single top-down entity with an economy of scale has more resources to secure itself than expecting EVERY little host and their dog to upgrade to the latest version of Wordpress.

austenallred 11y ago
generally it's worse for UX as well
adventured 11y ago
Social has been decentralized. I socialize with friends across a dozen digital platforms now. Email, phone calls, SMS, WhatsApp/Viber/Kik/Snapchat, Facebook, Skype, Twitter. Then throw in a dozen other communities, ranging from Hacker News, to Stack Overflow, to Reddit or Imgur, and so on. Social has been substantially decentralized. The only way it can be argued that it hasn't, is if you consider any corporate ownership of a platform to be by default non-decentralization (as opposed to having numerous available platforms being the decentralizing aspect).
- knieveltech 11y ago
  Email - logged and retained by service provider. Phone calls - tappable, metadata logged and retained by service provider. SMS - logged and retained by service provider. Skype - activity logged and retained by service provider. Twitter - activity logged and retained by service provider. You were saying something about decentralization?
  - pekk 11y ago
    It's not all that easy or cheap to decentralize the last mile. Things were not any more decentralized when most people used dialup, and they were definitely more centralized when the main users of the internet were on a few campuses.

bitL 11y ago

I've just had a simple idea while thinking about the conflict between privacy, freedom, law and democracy and its effect on the Internet. How about designing a new set of protocols that would be using the highest degree of available cryptography and obfuscation, minimizing leaking of traceable information, but having a democratic voting mechanism in its core (Paxos-style?) for "de-privacing" sources of information/traffic shall the majority of users decide (in cases clearly violating laws in grave matters etc.)? Direct democracy-style. How much of a pipe-dream would that be? What would be deficiencies of this approach and how could they be addressed? Is this even technically doable in a de-centralized fashion? Would apathy or malice of general population be the main risk? The motivation is that nobody would like to have all their private matters out in the open (which is a fact nowadays), but we need an efficient way to enforce reasonable laws (like preventing child abuse, selling hard drugs, illegal arms etc).

syense 11y ago
i think the main risk is mob mentality, especially polarizing stories could result in essentially innocent people having their private lives laid bare over sensationalist stories. you could, i suppose, couple the idea with a republican idea of senate to dampen that effect, but i suspect it wouldnt work.
Zigurd 11y ago
> but we need an efficient way to enforce reasonable laws (like preventing child abuse, selling hard drugs, illegal arms etc). We have that. All those crimes take place in meatspace. Which is where the police exist, too. Tell the police to do their jobs and detect actual crime, not thought-crime.