Winning back the Internet by building our own • Hacker News Board

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#51

Post by selfhoster11 » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 2:08 AM UTC

baxtr wrote: post #13

Can somebody explain to me, what "winning back the Internet" actually means?

There is a widespread perception that the old-style Internet of independent small sites has been subsumed by large social networking sites like Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and others. The ease of use, UX and network effect generated by these networks mean that it's a struggle to stay away from them and do your own thing. This is good for the non-technical folk, but leaves technical folk out in the cold because there are no major platforms that serve their needs.

"Winning back the internet" refers to pushing back against the dominance of those large centralized sites and the efforts to build the number of independent sites.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#52

Post by Uptrenda » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 2:12 AM UTC

It's a good article but light on the technical side. I would have liked to know more about alternative networking technologies that what make the vision possible beyond 'running ethernet cables' to different neighbors houses... There is likely to be all kinds of radio tech that could make town-size and then town-to-town links possible. But that's a niche subject

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#53

Post by humanrebar » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 2:15 AM UTC

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #47

Discussing torrents: > people were more easily able to access the things they needed without being forced to ask or pay for permission to have them. Haha. We’re not talking about folks stealing bread to feed their family. We’re talking about people stealing entertainment. There’s a lot wrong with big media corporations: DMCA takedown notice misuse, copyright for life of the artist + 75 years, exploitative contracts,…

It's rude and dishonorable to take something someone doesn't want to give you.

Even so, it's not the same category of misdeed as stealing bread. If you eat a loaf of bread, someone else cannot. But if you perform or listen to a song, it's still there for others. Sometimes, especially in the case of technically copyrighted but practically abandoned works, sharing the work is actually more likely to keep it available for others to discover or even access at all.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#54

Post by lazyjones » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 2:22 AM UTC

spurgu wrote: post #40

lazyjones wrote: post #29

I stopped reading at "would-be dictators like Trump".

Probably going to (and should) be downvoted as well, but... while I respect republican/conservative views, how can you not see that this moron is the epitome of a shitty wannabe dictator? He's used all his power to try to falsely prove that the election was a fraud (while building up for it all summer), and failing miserably at it. He would definitely try any other viable means if could. I don't even know what his ac…

You are resorting to cussing, you criticise that Trump is exercising his constitutionally granted right to sue when in his opinion he has been wronged and you openly admit ignorance and unwillingness to educate yourself about issues you pretend to be interested in.

Why do you believe your thus uttered opinions would change someone's mind (at least in the direction you would agree with), or, at least lead to an interesting discussion? Honest question.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#55

Post by jrnichols » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 2:23 AM UTC

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #47

Discussing torrents: > people were more easily able to access the things they needed without being forced to ask or pay for permission to have them. Haha. We’re not talking about folks stealing bread to feed their family. We’re talking about people stealing entertainment. There’s a lot wrong with big media corporations: DMCA takedown notice misuse, copyright for life of the artist + 75 years, exploitative contracts,…

theft n. the generic term for all crimes in which a person intentionally and fraudulently takes personal property of another without permission or consent and with the intent to convert it to the taker's use (including potential sale). In many states, if the value of the property taken is low (for example, less than $500) the crime is "petty theft," but it is "grand theft" for larger amounts, designated misdemeanor, or felony, respectively. Theft is synonymous with "larceny." Although robbery (taking by force), burglary (taken by entering unlawfully), and embezzlement (stealing from an employer) are all commonly thought of as theft, they are distinguished by the means and methods used, and are separately designated as those types of crimes in criminal charges and statutory punishments. (See: larceny, robbery, burglary, embezzlement)

--

Like it or not, no, it is not theft. Yell at the clouds until your throat is sore and you're blue in the face, and it still won't be theft.

watching a movie you did not pay for has never been theft, and never will be. This may anger you to the point of rage, but it's still not going to be theft no matter how much you declare it so.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#56

Post by jrnichols » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 2:28 AM UTC

The internet as we know it would be just fine if we de-commercialized it. Most websites as we know it don't need to be riddled with ads, google fonts, social media trackers, analytics.

"But how do we make money from it?" - if that's the first thought, then maybe it doesn't need to be there. I'd rather have the internet for sharing reliable information, not advertising. It was doing just fine before corporate marketing took it all over.

We can win it back by stripping it down from the bloated mess that it has become.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#57

Post by foxhop » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 2:33 AM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #25

It's not just that corporations own a lot of the physical infrastructure. Another factor is that humans as a group tend to force other humans to commercialize what they do, even if they expressly don't want to do that and would rather publish it without ads, without paywalls, without subscriptions, etc. We do a poor job of making it possible for people who create open source and people who create free content to get…

Fiercely put. I love it!

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#58

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 3:05 AM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #8

This article basically describes how the current internet was created.... why would this new internet end up any different? You can't expect every person to be skilled enough (and with the time and desire) to be their own network administrator, so someone will have to run the network for those people... and they will need to be compensated for that work... and some people will be really good at running that network,…

"You can't expect every person to be skilled enough (and witht the time and desire) to be their own network administrator, so someone will have to run the network for those people..."

Why would this new internetwork have to be made available to "those people". This comment seems to reframe the article's implicit "call to action" to a new set of constraints. It presupposes that an internetwork can only be created when it exists for commercial exploitation of its users, despite the author's example of a popular peer-to-peer network that generally has never been used as such, not to mention the "Internet" we are now using was not created for that purpose. (commercial exploitation)

It is curious this fascination with the definition of an internetwork as one that must mirror the present one and include amongst its users unskilled persons with no time or desire to learn how to use it but with money and a willingness (maybe even a forced necessity) to pay others to help them.

I wonder if there has ever existed a internetwork used only by skilled persons with time and desire to learn to use it, and not seeking to be compensated for the time they spent learning and the skills they developed as a result. If not, perhaps there will be.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#59

Post by mtVessel » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 3:07 AM UTC

jrnichols wrote: post #55

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #47

Discussing torrents: > people were more easily able to access the things they needed without being forced to ask or pay for permission to have them. Haha. We’re not talking about folks stealing bread to feed their family. We’re talking about people stealing entertainment. There’s a lot wrong with big media corporations: DMCA takedown notice misuse, copyright for life of the artist + 75 years, exploitative contracts,…

theft n. the generic term for all crimes in which a person intentionally and fraudulently takes personal property of another without permission or consent and with the intent to convert it to the taker's use (including potential sale). In many states, if the value of the property taken is low (for example, less than $500) the crime is "petty theft," but it is "grand theft" for larger amounts, designated misdemeanor,…

Similarly, you may repeat this mantra as many times you like, and yet, "theft of services" will still be a crime in most jurisdictions.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#60

Post by emodendroket » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 3:09 AM UTC

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, does it make a sound? Why would anybody sign up for an Internet that doesn't allow them to connect to people all over the country or the world, half the promise of the Internet in the first place? I think this is falling into the classic Linux trap where you assume normal people feel really strongly about your goals and proceed from that false premise.