/tech/ - Technology★

>>828302 (OP)

no

>>828338

I remember you, get back to the project. Sure there's tons of new-internet related projects, but most of them never get off the ground due to lack of marketing or just general unknowness. If you keep at it, create a general, and update us regularly, you might end up creating the next big thing.

>>828392

Since I made that proposal, everyone told me that CJDNS does what I was describing better. Also, I've increasingly become paranoid to the concept of "5G", with wireless nodes interlocking to each other and causing copious amounts of radiation. Idk if this would be good or bad. My thought behind using simple WiFi to connect the nodes was that it'd be easier than hobbiests laying cable, which would probably be illegal too.

>>828302 (OP)

Nice! It looks like you've got a logo and an IRC channel, so the hard work is done.

Or you could just join and work on expanding Hyperboria and stop wasting everyone's time.

https://hyperboria.net/

>>828413

Who runs the DNS servers? Who gets to be the TLD and hand out the domains? What stops either of them from being targets of litigation/law enforcement/etc;?

I’ll make the logo

>>828401

It's impossible to know if CJDNS is better at doing what you're describing since you never fully fleshed out your idea, get back to work on it fam

>>828423

>Who runs the DNS servers? Who gets to be the TLD and hand out the domains?

These are meaningless questions.

>What stops either of them from being targets of litigation/law enforcement/etc;?

What stops anything from being "targets of litigation/law enforcement/etc.?" On a long enough timeline if a sufficiently powerful entity is interested in disrupting your network, they'll do so. The Silk Road hidden service was found and shut down. Same for Alphabay and dozens of others. Do you think that law enforcement, or the FCC, or any number of other entities can't track down the devices running your little ad-hoc B.A.T.M.A.N.-based network?

>>828445

what if i want to host a website

didn't think about that did you

>>828445

>what is using tor OBFS servers in a closed loop for transfering gnunet based data so you don't use DNS

>what is tor obfs+ipfs

>>828464

Use GNUnet+tor obfs4 . That makes all traffic between you and your clients looks like https traffic to ISP's and you get a way to communicate without using DNS servers which avoids posters like >>828445 which are great firewall of china like spooks. If you are a pedo poster, then you need to kill yourself though.

>>828467

>user error, not the fault of the software.

Correct, but beside the point, which is that even software built from the ground up for anonymity cannot always protect you from "litigation, law enforcement, etc." Thus it's unreasonable to expect that kind of protection from Hyperboria/cjdns, and especially from the /g/tarded project in OP.

>/g/

It’s a wonder that they have a name already.

>>828467

>user error, not the fault of the software.

What is parallel construction? *tips tinfoil*

>>828338

>No one really was replying

Because you had your answer, CJDNS.Not much really to talk about beyond that.

As I remember it

>I want to make a project that does this

>>it already exists

>oh

...

>>828485

There's a difference: the Tor network (and other stuff like that) all require Internet. If your ISP shuts you down for whatever reason, you're dead in the water. It doesn't have to be any extreme case like Silk Road where the FBI is on your ass. No, it can just be someone doesn't like your political beliefs or something you're doing that's legal but they're opposed to it.

So it's always good to have an alternative. Especially since the big industry seems to want to enforce certain political viewpoints. You can see that by how they censor their platforms already. And we don't know how the Internet is going to turn out in 10-20 years. Maybe they'll win and sites like this will be shut down.

>>828633

A wireless mesh network will always be inferior in performance (bandwidth, latency, packet loss), reliability, and usability compared to wired networks. As long as our internet isn't being fucked with too much, no one is going to use this replacement network. And it won't be fucked that much, because they (the government and ISPs) know that people will look for an alternative. See all the mesh networks in China? No? Right, because they know when to stop. That's why obfuscating mesh networks like tor and i2p on existing internet infrastructure will win over wireless hardware meshes.

>>828633

Exactly this

>>828633

And an alternative network, like the meshnet being proposed, would be easy to detect and shut down, thus rendering you, once again, "dead in the water."

It's bizarre how many people in this thread are worried about "the authorities" (governments, businesses, etc.) engaging in fuckery via domain revocation, ISP blocks, lawsuits, and the like, but seem to think that the same authorities would somehow be rendered impotent by a rinky-dink meshnet being run illegally* by amateurs.

*One of the proposals in the /g/tardnet wiki linked in OP is to use ham frequencies. It's illegal to broadcast encrypted transmissions over those frequencies.

>>828774

Those are the weirdest looking horse dildos I've ever seen

>>828617

It was more than that. In my "RFS" I also say how we'll set these up and connect them in a point-to-point adhoc network. The protocol was only one part of a larger plan.

>>829031

>>828617

Also, when I discovered that "CJDNS" was being prefered by both my IRC channel and the thread in question, I accidently spilled a Coke-a-Cola on my computer, rendering it useless for 2 weeks. After I was able to log back on, I saw that people generally lost interest and there were only a few people. I asked people if we should use CJDNS or work further on my brainstorm, and only two people replied, one saying "CJDNS" and one saying mine.

>>828996

>encrypted transmissions

what about Morse code?

>/g/

>>828996

When you use the ISP's Internet, they already have means in place to shut you down at any second, without expending any money or energy. All it takes is some director at google or facebook that happens to know an equivalent at your ISP. They make the phone call, and that's it, your account is hitory (under typical terms & conditions they can pretty much cancel you anytime for any reason). But when you're on ad-hoc network, they have to actually expend reources to do it, and few people are worth that kind of trouble. So you just raised the bar and gave yourself an advantage.

Also it's not a given they will know you use such network, unless you're already under heavy surveillance by FBI. Sure, wifi is pretty easy to triangulate, but in the city there's RF everywhere you have wifi AP's (and there's a shitload of those). Your network can pretty much blend into the crowd there. Optical is much more rare, but harder to detect. And physical links like copper wire can be buried or run through existing conduits.

>>828996

>And an alternative network, like the meshnet being proposed, would be easy to detect and shut down

I thought the whole point of mesh networks is that they're difficult to shut down.

In the sense that trying to enforce a ban on a mesh network is much harder than shutting down an ISP. There's a difference between making things illegal and stopping people from doing things.

Furthermore, it's much harder to control and monitor traffic in a distributed network than a centralized one.

>>829031

>>829033

>RFS

>Coke-a-Cola

RFC, Coca-Cola

>>829111

No, not RFC. RFS. I named it in my PDF a "Request for Shitposting". And on the second, you're right.

>>829050

Morse code is an alphabet, encoded but not encrypted.

>>828302 (OP)

>gternet

>>829203

>Morse code is an alphabet, encoded but not encrypted.

Thanks for establishing the difference.

>/g/

Despite being cuckchan project, this looks like something I might have fun with, personally enjoying it. Too bad I'm a lurker with mediocre (for the standards of this board and myself) computer skills. Would contacting others about this project be a bad idea? Considering its mainly a cuckchan thing I wouldn't think the people involved would be that good at this kind of thing more veering towards some QUALITY territory. Maybe the boards have gotten a little better over the last three four years since most of us left, but I doubt it considering the state of /g/ as we left it. What do you guys think? I'm asking as I've never met up with others from either site so I'm not so sure how something like this would turn up. God, I'm surprised that I'm interested in something cuckchan is doing again for the most part.

>>829056

>>829089

Your naivete is amusing. The FCC has been shutting down pirate radio/TV stations and unlicensed ham broadcasters for decades. Finding a bunch of chantards who've modded their routers or set up illegal microwave transmitters would not be difficult for them.

If a meshnet is wireless and the nodes are stationary, it will only stay up if the authorities don't care about it.

>>828338

>location based addresses

Yeah CJDNS sounds superior

>Using one particular device for all the nodes

SJW pi memes aside, this looks like a security risk, it should be hostable on any toaster

>>829999

Yeah they found them because they were outright broadcasting pirate signal on licensed frequencies, for all to see. That's not at all what this discussion is about. This is about using normal wifi gear on their normal frequencies, which will make your meshnet just blend into the background, like all the other wifi in the city. And there's no signal to triangulate for optical and physical links (copper, fibre). That leaves packet radio but it's ok to use it if you're a licensed operator, although data speed for HAM isn't so fast.

>>829999

Use point to point laser comms then.

>still talking about off the shelf hardware

>still no routing solution

>>831517

>That's not at all what this discussion is about.

The project's own wiki disagrees with you.

>This is about using normal wifi gear on their normal frequencies, which will make your meshnet just blend into the background, like all the other wifi in the city.

lolno. There will be very few people ever participating in anything like this. That means they'll have to boost their WiFi transmission power to illegal levels (anything over 1 Watt in the U.S.) to actually make it work. It will very much stand out from other WiFi signals.

>And there's no signal to triangulate for optical and physical links (copper, fibre).

No significant amount of cable is ever going to be deployed for this project. Get real.

>That leaves packet radio but it's ok to use it if you're a licensed operator, although data speed for HAM isn't so fast.

The wiki is proposing an encrypted protocol. That would be illegal to broadcast over ham frequencies.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

>>831488

I was going to list devices with setup instructions for the novice and thought that in the initial stages of setting up infrastructure (my vision was literally thousands of these things hidden accross farmland, US Routes, the boonies interlinking city to city) that conformity in hardware choice would be a nessesity AT FIRST.

>>832113

You're talking about /g/ and their wiki and cianigger map (oddly enough it pops up at same time as many other "meetup" threads). We're talking about /tech/'s old project.