6 ms·

Which makes me wonder, is there a way to make an ad-hoc, decentralized internet that a government could not shut down?

DanielBMarkham 16y ago
Yes. They're called mesh networks, and I think you've just described why they will never take off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking
- seancron 16y ago
  Interesting. Are there any pieces of software that can transform ordinary laptops/phones into mesh networks? A quick search shows B.A.T.M.A.N. (http://www.open-mesh.org/ http://www.open-mesh.org/), but it looks a little tricky to setup. Are there any simple ways for non-technical users to run a mesh network node? A "click to install and run" solution would be ideal, but I'd be interested in hearing about other people's experiences with mesh networks.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Open wrt support mesh networking iirc. There is also this: http://www.wing-project.org/ http://www.wing-project.org/ And a bunch of others.
    - nantes 16y ago
      IIRC, OpenMesh actually sits on top of OpenWRT.
  - nantes 16y ago
    BATMAN, OSLR, and Open-Mesh are pretty slick. But, and a big but, we struggled running a network of ~500 of them in one medium-size Midwest city. It's not targeted at laptops, but at embedded boards somewhat like you would find in a commodity Linksys home router. The best help they can get is, IMO, coders and new hardware to develop for/test on.
  - Jach 16y ago
    I think this is linked from the wiki article, but it's a good read for various general info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Building_a_Rural_Wireless_Mesh_Network_-_A_DIY_Guide_v0.8.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Building_a_Rural_Wireless_... I haven't set one up myself but if the government did kill the internet I'd take it as a good time to start creating a city-by-city mesh, hopefully hooking up with other people with the same idea. If the government leaves the regular lines off for too long, it may actually end up being a good thing. I don't think the kill-switch strategy would work so well in the US, so long as it's not short-term, but it's possible the people who want the ability of a kill-switch haven't thought it through.
  - nitrogen 16y ago
    The OLPC XO laptop has built-in mesh networking and is ruggedized, so it would be a great asset to have after a disaster of some kind. Maybe keep one stored in a Faraday cage to try to protect it against EMP ;).
- sliverstorm 16y ago
  I've always been under the impression the reason mesh networks haven't taken off is because of the cost & speed benefits of centralized colocation data centers and trans-continental backbones, but maybe I'm just not paranoid enough.
  - nitrogen 16y ago
    The paranoid conspiracy theorist in me also suspects that this is why the FCC fought against UWB approval. http://stevencrowley.com/2010/09/02/ultra-wideband-how-regulatory-and-standardization-delays-slowed-its-progress/ http://stevencrowley.com/2010/09/02/ultra-wideband-how-regul... There are many devices using UWB, but as far as I know, none of them allow long-range communication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_USB http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_USB http://www.gefen.com/kvm/product.jsp?prod_id=4318 http://www.gefen.com/kvm/product.jsp?prod_id=4318
    - sliverstorm 16y ago
      Reading that article carefully, I think what happened is this: - UWB failed because it was out-competed - it was out-competed because it was using a new spectrum, while the competition was using the already existing 2.4GHz channel, so it had to deal with the FCC when the competition simply didn't. i.e. it sounds like they just had an extra hurdle to jump (and a bureaucratic one at that) that made it hard to win, rather than the FCC actively attempting to prevent it's use.
jemfinch 16y ago
It's arguable, but I'd say that the real Internet is like that, at least in well-connected places like the US. I cannot imagine the act of God necessary to stop Americans from accessing Google.
- danenania 16y ago
  You know, it seems that way, but Americans might be the most docile population on earth. There's no way I'd believe they could get away with all the shit they have in the last decade with nothing but token complaints from the masses if it hadn't already happened. If the end of the internet in America was decreed tomorrow, sure it would be a monumental logistical challenge for the NSA, but there's always the Fed to provide them with whatever budget they need, and given what Americans are already perfectly willing to put up with, it isn't likely they'd do anything but roll over after a few sham demonstrations in designated sham demonstration areas. It's depressing, but I think it's important for us to be realistic about how bad the situation really is if we're ever going to do something serious about fixing it. The reason we still have most of the privileges we do isn't because we're too powerful to have them taken away from us, it's because there hasn't yet been a need to take them away, or because we haven't (yet) elected someone with that sort of style (we certainly HAVE been too close for comfort). I mean, America is effectively bankrolling the Egyptian censorship. There clearly aren't any qualms with the tactics.
  - jemfinch 16y ago
    Americans may be docile, but businesses and corporations are not. What do you think the proprietors of the thousands of POPs across America are going to tell the feds who come to shut them down? What do you think Google or Microsoft or Facebook are going to say when the government tries to cut off their primary source of income? Do you really think the same corporations that extensively lobby the government now are going to sit idly by while the government shuts this Internet thing down?
    - danenania 16y ago
      "What do you think Google or Microsoft or Facebook are going to say when the government tries to cut off their primary source of income?" They're going to say: "how much will you pay us to help you do it?" The answer will be "a lot" as it's always been. And the answer if they don't comply will be "you're finished". Standard mafioso tactics. Are you really expecting giant corporations to have principles at all, not to mention principles they are willing to sacrifice themselves for? Anyone within who suggests they should will hastily be shown the door. That's how the modern corporation is structured. The filthily rich throughout history haven't exactly been the harbingers of revolution.
iwwr 16y ago
The government needs the internet for its own internal communications. Also, the banking system or any electronic commerce can't function. Just imagine the world going back to 1980. A parasite can't risk outright killing its host.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Tell that to the Egyptians. The government there strategically left the one provider up that they themselves use and all others are down. I'd imagine that if a relatively low-tech country like Egypt can pull off a sophisticated partitioning like that on a moments notice that most other countries would be able to do so as well but probably in a more precise manner. > A parasite can't risk outright killing its host. Beware of people with nothing to lose.
sans-serif 16y ago
Yes, it's called HAM radio.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Agreed, the HAM radio and HAM packet network will outlast all other means of communication and then there is CW.
- knowaveragejoe 16y ago
  Unfortunately, a determined governing body with the resources to back it could still track HAM operators down.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    They wouldn't have to do much tracking, there is a public registry. On another note, during WWII the mere possession of a radio was grounds for execution in plenty of places, let alone a transmitter, but that didn't stop people from having radios concealed in the most ingenious ways.
    - knowaveragejoe 16y ago
      True enough. My point was, a governing body with the right resources could track down -anyone- transmitting, HAM or not. Those concealing radios to listen, however, are a whole other ballgame.
      - jacquesm 16y ago
        The way it was done was like this: information was smuggled out of Belgium, France and the Netherlands by any conceivable means in a slow but fairly steady drip, then broadcast back to the occupied territories from UK soil. So that's why the radios were so important, and that's why they were illegal.
knowaveragejoe 16y ago
There is also the Netsukkuku project. http://netsukuku.freaknet.org/ http://netsukuku.freaknet.org/ However, it requires other nodes around you to have the software installed as well, which would require planning prior to a significant enough communications outage that would warrant its use.

Yes. They're called mesh networks, and I think you've just described why they will never take off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking

seancron 16y ago
Interesting. Are there any pieces of software that can transform ordinary laptops/phones into mesh networks? A quick search shows B.A.T.M.A.N. (http://www.open-mesh.org/ http://www.open-mesh.org/), but it looks a little tricky to setup. Are there any simple ways for non-technical users to run a mesh network node? A "click to install and run" solution would be ideal, but I'd be interested in hearing about other people's experiences with mesh networks.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Open wrt support mesh networking iirc. There is also this: http://www.wing-project.org/ http://www.wing-project.org/ And a bunch of others.
  - nantes 16y ago
    IIRC, OpenMesh actually sits on top of OpenWRT.
- nantes 16y ago
  BATMAN, OSLR, and Open-Mesh are pretty slick. But, and a big but, we struggled running a network of ~500 of them in one medium-size Midwest city. It's not targeted at laptops, but at embedded boards somewhat like you would find in a commodity Linksys home router. The best help they can get is, IMO, coders and new hardware to develop for/test on.
- Jach 16y ago
  I think this is linked from the wiki article, but it's a good read for various general info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Building_a_Rural_Wireless_Mesh_Network_-_A_DIY_Guide_v0.8.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Building_a_Rural_Wireless_... I haven't set one up myself but if the government did kill the internet I'd take it as a good time to start creating a city-by-city mesh, hopefully hooking up with other people with the same idea. If the government leaves the regular lines off for too long, it may actually end up being a good thing. I don't think the kill-switch strategy would work so well in the US, so long as it's not short-term, but it's possible the people who want the ability of a kill-switch haven't thought it through.
- nitrogen 16y ago
  The OLPC XO laptop has built-in mesh networking and is ruggedized, so it would be a great asset to have after a disaster of some kind. Maybe keep one stored in a Faraday cage to try to protect it against EMP ;).
sliverstorm 16y ago
I've always been under the impression the reason mesh networks haven't taken off is because of the cost & speed benefits of centralized colocation data centers and trans-continental backbones, but maybe I'm just not paranoid enough.
- nitrogen 16y ago
  The paranoid conspiracy theorist in me also suspects that this is why the FCC fought against UWB approval. http://stevencrowley.com/2010/09/02/ultra-wideband-how-regulatory-and-standardization-delays-slowed-its-progress/ http://stevencrowley.com/2010/09/02/ultra-wideband-how-regul... There are many devices using UWB, but as far as I know, none of them allow long-range communication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_USB http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_USB http://www.gefen.com/kvm/product.jsp?prod_id=4318 http://www.gefen.com/kvm/product.jsp?prod_id=4318
  - sliverstorm 16y ago
    Reading that article carefully, I think what happened is this: - UWB failed because it was out-competed - it was out-competed because it was using a new spectrum, while the competition was using the already existing 2.4GHz channel, so it had to deal with the FCC when the competition simply didn't. i.e. it sounds like they just had an extra hurdle to jump (and a bureaucratic one at that) that made it hard to win, rather than the FCC actively attempting to prevent it's use.

jemfinch 16y ago

It's arguable, but I'd say that the real Internet is like that, at least in well-connected places like the US. I cannot imagine the act of God necessary to stop Americans from accessing Google.

danenania 16y ago
You know, it seems that way, but Americans might be the most docile population on earth. There's no way I'd believe they could get away with all the shit they have in the last decade with nothing but token complaints from the masses if it hadn't already happened. If the end of the internet in America was decreed tomorrow, sure it would be a monumental logistical challenge for the NSA, but there's always the Fed to provide them with whatever budget they need, and given what Americans are already perfectly willing to put up with, it isn't likely they'd do anything but roll over after a few sham demonstrations in designated sham demonstration areas. It's depressing, but I think it's important for us to be realistic about how bad the situation really is if we're ever going to do something serious about fixing it. The reason we still have most of the privileges we do isn't because we're too powerful to have them taken away from us, it's because there hasn't yet been a need to take them away, or because we haven't (yet) elected someone with that sort of style (we certainly HAVE been too close for comfort). I mean, America is effectively bankrolling the Egyptian censorship. There clearly aren't any qualms with the tactics.
- jemfinch 16y ago
  Americans may be docile, but businesses and corporations are not. What do you think the proprietors of the thousands of POPs across America are going to tell the feds who come to shut them down? What do you think Google or Microsoft or Facebook are going to say when the government tries to cut off their primary source of income? Do you really think the same corporations that extensively lobby the government now are going to sit idly by while the government shuts this Internet thing down?
  - danenania 16y ago
    "What do you think Google or Microsoft or Facebook are going to say when the government tries to cut off their primary source of income?" They're going to say: "how much will you pay us to help you do it?" The answer will be "a lot" as it's always been. And the answer if they don't comply will be "you're finished". Standard mafioso tactics. Are you really expecting giant corporations to have principles at all, not to mention principles they are willing to sacrifice themselves for? Anyone within who suggests they should will hastily be shown the door. That's how the modern corporation is structured. The filthily rich throughout history haven't exactly been the harbingers of revolution.

iwwr 16y ago

The government needs the internet for its own internal communications. Also, the banking system or any electronic commerce can't function. Just imagine the world going back to 1980. A parasite can't risk outright killing its host.

jacquesm 16y ago
Tell that to the Egyptians. The government there strategically left the one provider up that they themselves use and all others are down. I'd imagine that if a relatively low-tech country like Egypt can pull off a sophisticated partitioning like that on a moments notice that most other countries would be able to do so as well but probably in a more precise manner. > A parasite can't risk outright killing its host. Beware of people with nothing to lose.

sans-serif 16y ago

Yes, it's called HAM radio.

jacquesm 16y ago
Agreed, the HAM radio and HAM packet network will outlast all other means of communication and then there is CW.
knowaveragejoe 16y ago
Unfortunately, a determined governing body with the resources to back it could still track HAM operators down.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  They wouldn't have to do much tracking, there is a public registry. On another note, during WWII the mere possession of a radio was grounds for execution in plenty of places, let alone a transmitter, but that didn't stop people from having radios concealed in the most ingenious ways.
  - knowaveragejoe 16y ago
    True enough. My point was, a governing body with the right resources could track down -anyone- transmitting, HAM or not. Those concealing radios to listen, however, are a whole other ballgame.
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      The way it was done was like this: information was smuggled out of Belgium, France and the Netherlands by any conceivable means in a slow but fairly steady drip, then broadcast back to the occupied territories from UK soil. So that's why the radios were so important, and that's why they were illegal.

knowaveragejoe 16y ago

There is also the Netsukkuku project. http://netsukuku.freaknet.org/ http://netsukuku.freaknet.org/ However, it requires other nodes around you to have the software installed as well, which would require planning prior to a significant enough communications outage that would warrant its use.