File: c6fd95e6ce4fd7bcccbcba8b0e019309f2e4b358100f86bc67c22faffc8facd1.webm (dl) (6.71 MiB)
/g/ - Technology
install openbsd
[Make a Post]The situation in Iraq is a good argument for the need for distributed meshnets like B.A.T.M.A.N. It's a better argument for the U.S. ceasing to engage in regime change in foreign nations for no good goddamn reason.
>muh freedumbs durr
It never stops with you Darpa shills and the amerimutts does it.
It never stops with you Darpa shills and the amerimutts does it.
I was interested in Netsukuku years ago and even thought about doing some research based on it but lack of resources prohibited me from doing so.
Is this thing and BATMAN and similar meshnets a thing these days?
Is this thing and BATMAN and similar meshnets a thing these days?
>>7706
>This is why we need distributed meshnets.
>we
I need meshnets because some shitskins are rioting?
>B.A.T.M.A.N (Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking) and Netsukuku never succeeded.
First seems to be in development, second is dead.
The trouble with meshnets is that you need people, organisation. And nobody but your local 3 nerds are going to even entertain the idea of something like this until the connection is actually cut. So, in the meantime, assuming you are just being denied Internet access but not power, a rapidly deploying meshnet using something everybody has is more feasible. See Hong Kong protesters and a totally organic US based startup that happened to have this developed: http://archivecaslytosk.onion/IYc34 . Bluetooth is a very widespread and easily accessible technology, making it efficient. Just watch out for charming people convincing you to bomb federal buildings over it.
But let's take it a step further. Say shit really has hit the fan and your regular Internet is the least of your concerns. A meshnet's only good if you have a constant flow of power, assuming you live in an area that is populated enough for it. However, the power grid is so fucking weak, non-redundant and undefended in every single country that it's like praying for a miracle. Or are you telling me that all nodes are going to run diesel generators? You either go back to radio comms or something similar - some Mad Max bullshit router that can be powered with a crankshaft and has some form of NVRAM. Come to think of it, wasn't there already some infrastructure in place for networking over HAM radio?
You also have to think about it from the government's perspective if you want to operate the mesh effectively. By cutting off Internet access, they are attempting to quell the massive amounts of foreign influence pouring fuel on the fire. It may appear incompetent, but then again not every government has a stacked intelligence roster to control it with soft blocks. Or a military not staffed by inbred desert retards, that can actually scatter masses. And if your node is stationary and requires noticable maintenance and watch, you may find your door busted down in the name of stability. You can say the same thing about just smashing every smartphone at military checkpoints, but it's harder to do at least.
>>7708
>It's a better argument
What's a better argument, a fucking meshnet?
>U.S. ceasing to engage in regime change in foreign nations for no good goddamn reason
A golem obeys its ruler, it doesn't exactly need a reason for it.
>This is why we need distributed meshnets.
>we
I need meshnets because some shitskins are rioting?
>B.A.T.M.A.N (Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking) and Netsukuku never succeeded.
First seems to be in development, second is dead.
The trouble with meshnets is that you need people, organisation. And nobody but your local 3 nerds are going to even entertain the idea of something like this until the connection is actually cut. So, in the meantime, assuming you are just being denied Internet access but not power, a rapidly deploying meshnet using something everybody has is more feasible. See Hong Kong protesters and a totally organic US based startup that happened to have this developed: http://archivecaslytosk.onion/IYc34 . Bluetooth is a very widespread and easily accessible technology, making it efficient. Just watch out for charming people convincing you to bomb federal buildings over it.
But let's take it a step further. Say shit really has hit the fan and your regular Internet is the least of your concerns. A meshnet's only good if you have a constant flow of power, assuming you live in an area that is populated enough for it. However, the power grid is so fucking weak, non-redundant and undefended in every single country that it's like praying for a miracle. Or are you telling me that all nodes are going to run diesel generators? You either go back to radio comms or something similar - some Mad Max bullshit router that can be powered with a crankshaft and has some form of NVRAM. Come to think of it, wasn't there already some infrastructure in place for networking over HAM radio?
You also have to think about it from the government's perspective if you want to operate the mesh effectively. By cutting off Internet access, they are attempting to quell the massive amounts of foreign influence pouring fuel on the fire. It may appear incompetent, but then again not every government has a stacked intelligence roster to control it with soft blocks. Or a military not staffed by inbred desert retards, that can actually scatter masses. And if your node is stationary and requires noticable maintenance and watch, you may find your door busted down in the name of stability. You can say the same thing about just smashing every smartphone at military checkpoints, but it's harder to do at least.
>>7708
>It's a better argument
What's a better argument, a fucking meshnet?
>U.S. ceasing to engage in regime change in foreign nations for no good goddamn reason
A golem obeys its ruler, it doesn't exactly need a reason for it.
Meshnets may work ok in urban areas, but are not very feasible outside of those areas. Regular wifi doesn't have the range to go very far without upgrading to regulated microwave frequencies. Wifi will work okay for endpoint distribution, but for backhaul connections, something like free-space optical wireless communication would need to be used.
>>7746
>What's a better argument, a fucking meshnet?
No, the situation in Iraq. Learn to read standard English, you stupid motherfucker.
>What's a better argument, a fucking meshnet?
No, the situation in Iraq. Learn to read standard English, you stupid motherfucker.
>>7746
>The trouble with meshnets is that you need people, organisation.
True, but not necessarily something difficult (technically speaking). See Briar Project. It's basically a Whatsapp, but supports bluetooth mesh with Tor. Doesn't require any special knowledge.
>power grid
That's why everyone should have solar panels.
>networking over HAM radio
Too slow. The best we have now is LoRaWAN.
>The trouble with meshnets is that you need people, organisation.
True, but not necessarily something difficult (technically speaking). See Briar Project. It's basically a Whatsapp, but supports bluetooth mesh with Tor. Doesn't require any special knowledge.
>power grid
That's why everyone should have solar panels.
>networking over HAM radio
Too slow. The best we have now is LoRaWAN.
>>7761
How about you stop bringing your lukewarm, brainlet views on politics to a meshnet thread instead?
>>7794
>See Briar Project
A lot better than Bridgefy, I have to say. I wonder if systems like this are vulnerable to malicious clients bloating up the network. Plant Bluetooth powered nodes all around your area with the help of soldiers, turn them on for spam and regular people may be hampered.
>That's why everyone should have solar panels
In Iraq maybe. But not everywhere, considering some parts of the Northern hemisphere get really little sunlight at times. It also makes your entire network vulnerable to shitty weather or plain seasonal dust storms/haze.
>Too slow
Well, the point is that it's a system that is very low-tech and not too hard to operate. Meaning that, once Internet/Bluetooth-based meshnets are out of the picture, something like this can linger on.
How about you stop bringing your lukewarm, brainlet views on politics to a meshnet thread instead?
>>7794
>See Briar Project
A lot better than Bridgefy, I have to say. I wonder if systems like this are vulnerable to malicious clients bloating up the network. Plant Bluetooth powered nodes all around your area with the help of soldiers, turn them on for spam and regular people may be hampered.
>That's why everyone should have solar panels
In Iraq maybe. But not everywhere, considering some parts of the Northern hemisphere get really little sunlight at times. It also makes your entire network vulnerable to shitty weather or plain seasonal dust storms/haze.
>Too slow
Well, the point is that it's a system that is very low-tech and not too hard to operate. Meaning that, once Internet/Bluetooth-based meshnets are out of the picture, something like this can linger on.
>>7748
Free-space optical was suggested in an earlier thread. But this still can only see as far as the horizon. Even if you can string enough nodes to get from boston to new york, you will never make it across the atlantic. If you could get a short wave laser, you could bounce it off the ionosphere, and get much better distance. This is similar to ham radio, but you could do it without a license, and wouldn't have to follow ham radio regulations like the ban on encryption.
>>7746
The primary concern isn't that things get so bad the internet gets knocked out, it's that the government starts censoring the internet. This will probably start happening more and more over the next few decades, as governments decide that the internet is a threat to their sovereignty. It was last year or so that a canadian court forced google to delist a website worldwide over trademark issues. Then more recently an euro court had something banned worldwide over "defamation" (saying mean things about important people). Then we have the mess down under to get the tarrant business banned. China is already on a segregated network, russia is moving towards that. Everyone's scared about "foreign influence on elections" (ie people deciding to vote for trump). So the free internet we know and love may not last very long.
A mesh net is about network redundancy, and not relying on commercial ISPs. Obviously it's even better if it has redundant power as well, but doing this well is extremely difficult, whereas a reliable meshnet off of grid power may be within reach. I think we should avoid thinking about power until the mesh net is properly in place, and governments start looking for ways to ban it.
Free-space optical was suggested in an earlier thread. But this still can only see as far as the horizon. Even if you can string enough nodes to get from boston to new york, you will never make it across the atlantic. If you could get a short wave laser, you could bounce it off the ionosphere, and get much better distance. This is similar to ham radio, but you could do it without a license, and wouldn't have to follow ham radio regulations like the ban on encryption.
>>7746
The primary concern isn't that things get so bad the internet gets knocked out, it's that the government starts censoring the internet. This will probably start happening more and more over the next few decades, as governments decide that the internet is a threat to their sovereignty. It was last year or so that a canadian court forced google to delist a website worldwide over trademark issues. Then more recently an euro court had something banned worldwide over "defamation" (saying mean things about important people). Then we have the mess down under to get the tarrant business banned. China is already on a segregated network, russia is moving towards that. Everyone's scared about "foreign influence on elections" (ie people deciding to vote for trump). So the free internet we know and love may not last very long.
A mesh net is about network redundancy, and not relying on commercial ISPs. Obviously it's even better if it has redundant power as well, but doing this well is extremely difficult, whereas a reliable meshnet off of grid power may be within reach. I think we should avoid thinking about power until the mesh net is properly in place, and governments start looking for ways to ban it.
>Then more recently an euro court had something banned worldwide over "defamation" (saying mean things about important people).
post contents of this banned site
>Everyone's scared about "foreign influence on elections" (ie people deciding to vote for trump).
people didn't decide for trump. there is no democracy in US. trump and clinton are jewish cock suckers
post contents of this banned site
>Everyone's scared about "foreign influence on elections" (ie people deciding to vote for trump).
people didn't decide for trump. there is no democracy in US. trump and clinton are jewish cock suckers
>>7819
>A mesh net is about network redundancy, and not relying on commercial ISPs.
I guess in that case it would be best to use whatever technologies and protocols John Q. Public might be able to use. The more different and mundane the use cases are for it, the better it can be. But how would your average nanon be able to spread the technology among the non-technologically minded? I guess you can wait until riots and protests start in your country, but it might be too late by then.
>A mesh net is about network redundancy, and not relying on commercial ISPs.
I guess in that case it would be best to use whatever technologies and protocols John Q. Public might be able to use. The more different and mundane the use cases are for it, the better it can be. But how would your average nanon be able to spread the technology among the non-technologically minded? I guess you can wait until riots and protests start in your country, but it might be too late by then.
>>7834
>this banned site
the site was facebook. The post regarded calling a politician named Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek a "lousy traitor of the people" and corrupt. Here's an article about it:
https://www.courthousenews.com/eu-court-says-facebook-is-subject-to-worldwide-content-removal/
http://archivecaslytosk.onion/ro4I4
>people didn't decide for trump. there is no democracy in US. trump and clinton are jewish cock suckers
People picked which jewish cocksucker they wanted. Anyways, we shouldn't make this a politics thread, the point isn't whether trump was fairly elected, but that they're using this as an excuse to control the internet.
>>7835
>I guess in that case it would be best to use whatever technologies and protocols John Q. Public might be able to use.
The best alternative is to have a range of technologies, and have the network adapt to what people are using. If a small number of people set up FSO connections, then anyone nearby would be able to connect to them for long range communication.
>The more different and mundane the use cases are for it, the better it can be
I'll give you this app idea I had for free: normies love sharing images, so you would have a simple mesh net for images. Someone would take a picture, and everyone nearby would be able to see it. They could save it themselves, reforward it, or whatever. For normies you could have facebook integration and so on, but the app would also work perfectly fine without an internet connection.
People on mobile data would appreciate being able to share images without using their cap. If there was something you wanted to get a picture of but you missed it, then maybe someone else did and you can steal it. Thots would appreciate being able to share half-naked pictures to only people nearby. I'm sure that normies would use it. I can make the logo if anyone's interested.
>this banned site
the site was facebook. The post regarded calling a politician named Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek a "lousy traitor of the people" and corrupt. Here's an article about it:
https://www.courthousenews.com/eu-court-says-facebook-is-subject-to-worldwide-content-removal/
http://archivecaslytosk.onion/ro4I4
>people didn't decide for trump. there is no democracy in US. trump and clinton are jewish cock suckers
People picked which jewish cocksucker they wanted. Anyways, we shouldn't make this a politics thread, the point isn't whether trump was fairly elected, but that they're using this as an excuse to control the internet.
>>7835
>I guess in that case it would be best to use whatever technologies and protocols John Q. Public might be able to use.
The best alternative is to have a range of technologies, and have the network adapt to what people are using. If a small number of people set up FSO connections, then anyone nearby would be able to connect to them for long range communication.
>The more different and mundane the use cases are for it, the better it can be
I'll give you this app idea I had for free: normies love sharing images, so you would have a simple mesh net for images. Someone would take a picture, and everyone nearby would be able to see it. They could save it themselves, reforward it, or whatever. For normies you could have facebook integration and so on, but the app would also work perfectly fine without an internet connection.
People on mobile data would appreciate being able to share images without using their cap. If there was something you wanted to get a picture of but you missed it, then maybe someone else did and you can steal it. Thots would appreciate being able to share half-naked pictures to only people nearby. I'm sure that normies would use it. I can make the logo if anyone's interested.
Let's be honest, Elon Musk is a fucking dolt, but something like starlink is the only real answer we'll ever have.
[Catalog][Overboard][Update]
[Reply]1 files, 13 replies
B.A.T.M.A.N (Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking) and Netsukuku never succeeded. It's time to recreate this.
http://axqzx4s6s54s32yentfqojs3x5i7faxza6xo3ehd4bzzsg2ii4fv2iid.onion/watch?v=kXvMlh4-zh0