3 ms·

Yeah, but it is possible to make distributed systems. I've written up a little toy in Erlang where you have lots of connections to peers and send dummy message

Yeah, but it is possible to make distributed systems. I've written up a little toy in Erlang where you have lots of connections to peers and send dummy messages, all of the same size, to all your peers continuously and then, because of this, you can obviously send a message to whoever you like without anyone being able to know to whom you sent it. With a bit of extra delay you can add retransmission, and then you can have huge networks. Complete resistance to traffic analysis. The only thing you need to accept to have this kind of security is to accept that message timing might be 1/s, or 0.1/s, but for things like e-mail that isn't a problem at all. My system is not done. I had intended to finish it if ChatControl 2.0 passed, but since it didn't, and there's upon that a war on I didn't put it out, and I thought it was a bad idea to popularize this kind of thing since there was a war on, but it's quite straightforward. Many here could probably write something like it.

iamnothere 1mo ago
There are plenty of P2P and anonymous collaboration tools out there, but the problem for these groups is that members will use insecure tools unless they are as convenient and capable as what they are used to. This is the same reason that the government constantly screws up its own opsec. Nontechnical people in any group are a serious problem for maintaining security. (This is also why law enforcement concerns about encryption are overblown.)
- impossiblefork 1mo ago
  Yes, but then you have to accept that they can't be part of a group that needs security. If they aren't willing to do things correctly, not be lazy etc., and you tell them that this means that adversaries will be able to pinpoint them, and pinpoint you and everybody else, and they don't express that they're going to take the effort to be reasonable, then maybe you shouldn't talk to them.
  - iamnothere 1mo ago
    True. If you look at the average person who gets involved in radical politics, many often have issues sticking to a strict security regime. I think this may be why “black bloc” groups and the like are normally smaller splinter groups within the larger movement. Garden variety protestors, activists, and local organizers are probably fine using something like Signal.
    - godwinson__4-8 1mo ago
      They are splinter groups because they are violent cowards who use mainstream protests (that might actually have a shot of convincing people of something) as a meat shield for their vandalism. Minneapolis showed us the way. Sandwich guy showed us the way. The civil rights movement showed us the way. Black bloc is embarrassing and associated with the consistent failures of post 60s left wing bubble politics. The most obviously incompetent right wing government in the United States in years, and we are talking about black bloc? How about getting someone capable to make an argument against them instead of resorting to street tactics - literally the one thing this administration is salivating for as it would offer them an opportunity at mainstream redemption. Left wing politics is truly so depressing. At this point I would respect a movement that openly argued/modeled a path for blue state secession more than the multitude of left wing degenerates who seem to have gotten their civics from V for Vendetta.
      - StilesCrisis 1mo ago
        [flagged]
      - iamnothere 1mo ago
        I mean, you’re not wrong, but that’s not really on topic. POSIWID applies to political groups as well. Real change would require hard work, vision, and group discipline. We don’t do that here!
StilesCrisis 1mo ago
Doesn't that scale up terribly? If everyone has 100 friends and is constantly pinging them every second, you're just flooding the internet with junk.
- impossiblefork 1mo ago
  Yes, but it's fine. If you receive 10,000 messages per second, that's nothing. That means that you can have 10,000 people online simultaneously with 1 message per second and 100,000 people online simultaneously with 1 message every ten seconds even in the version where there is no retransmission.

iamnothere 1mo ago

There are plenty of P2P and anonymous collaboration tools out there, but the problem for these groups is that members will use insecure tools unless they are as convenient and capable as what they are used to. This is the same reason that the government constantly screws up its own opsec. Nontechnical people in any group are a serious problem for maintaining security. (This is also why law enforcement concerns about encryption are overblown.)

impossiblefork 1mo ago
Yes, but then you have to accept that they can't be part of a group that needs security. If they aren't willing to do things correctly, not be lazy etc., and you tell them that this means that adversaries will be able to pinpoint them, and pinpoint you and everybody else, and they don't express that they're going to take the effort to be reasonable, then maybe you shouldn't talk to them.
- iamnothere 1mo ago
  True. If you look at the average person who gets involved in radical politics, many often have issues sticking to a strict security regime. I think this may be why “black bloc” groups and the like are normally smaller splinter groups within the larger movement. Garden variety protestors, activists, and local organizers are probably fine using something like Signal.
  - godwinson__4-8 1mo ago
    They are splinter groups because they are violent cowards who use mainstream protests (that might actually have a shot of convincing people of something) as a meat shield for their vandalism. Minneapolis showed us the way. Sandwich guy showed us the way. The civil rights movement showed us the way. Black bloc is embarrassing and associated with the consistent failures of post 60s left wing bubble politics. The most obviously incompetent right wing government in the United States in years, and we are talking about black bloc? How about getting someone capable to make an argument against them instead of resorting to street tactics - literally the one thing this administration is salivating for as it would offer them an opportunity at mainstream redemption. Left wing politics is truly so depressing. At this point I would respect a movement that openly argued/modeled a path for blue state secession more than the multitude of left wing degenerates who seem to have gotten their civics from V for Vendetta.
    - StilesCrisis 1mo ago
      [flagged]
    - iamnothere 1mo ago
      I mean, you’re not wrong, but that’s not really on topic. POSIWID applies to political groups as well. Real change would require hard work, vision, and group discipline. We don’t do that here!

StilesCrisis 1mo ago

Doesn't that scale up terribly? If everyone has 100 friends and is constantly pinging them every second, you're just flooding the internet with junk.

impossiblefork 1mo ago
Yes, but it's fine. If you receive 10,000 messages per second, that's nothing. That means that you can have 10,000 people online simultaneously with 1 message per second and 100,000 people online simultaneously with 1 message every ten seconds even in the version where there is no retransmission.