Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Winning back the Internet by building our own

roarmag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 159 posts

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#61

Post by cortesoft »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #58
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…

If your definition includes networks only used by a few technical hobbyists, then a lot of those networks already exist.

This article seems to be a call to action, and it doesn't make sense to ask for something if it already exists.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#62

Post by dnautics »

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,…

> watching movies and show you didn’t pay for is theft

When I have a bike and you steal it from me, you are depriving me of the use of that bicycle. That's what makes it theft.

There is no deprival, therefore no theft in "watching something you didn't pay for".

If you argue "you are depriving the right of the artist to make money" that makes the assumption that the right of an artist to coerce money out of the counterparty existed. And yes, I make art, highly valuable art, with my creative brain, and I give it away without expecting any compensation for it. Yet I still find a way to eat. Huh.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#63

Post by jcranmer »

lazyjones wrote: post #54
spurgu wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 intere…

> you criticise that Trump is exercising his constitutionally granted right to sue when in his opinion he has been wronged

Having actually read some of those suits, I would say you could make a case that Giuliani should be disbarred. These suits are cases where the Trump campaign usually has no standing, the claims are often not even proper allegations, the remedies sought are literally unprecedented, and often even the timing is improper (basically, challenging election procedures after the election can only be done in exceptional circumstances). You may have a right to sue people, but you do not have a right to harass people through lawsuits, and the suits in question are closer to the latter.

(Side note: you don't have a constitutionally-granted right to sue people. You do have one to sue the government, though.)

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#64

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

cortesoft wrote: post #61
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

If your definition includes networks only used by a few technical hobbyists, then a lot of those networks already exist. This article seems to be a call to action, and it doesn't make sense to ask for something if it already exists.

What I am wondering is why you would question such a (seemingly harmless) call to action. Particulary the last paragraph which simply suggests going forward people might spend less time focusing on learning programming and more time focusing on learning networking. If this "call to action" were to garner any traction, would it impact you personally, or anyone you care about, in a negative way?

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#66

Post by cortesoft »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #64
cortesoft wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your definition includes networks only used by a few technical hobbyists, then a lot of those networks already exist. This article seems to be a call to action, and it doesn't make sense to ask for something if it already exists.

What I am wondering is why you would question such a (seemingly harmless) call to action. Particulary the last paragraph which simply suggests going forward people might spend less time focusing on learning programming and more time focusing on learning networking. If this "call to action" were to garner any traction, would it impact you personally, or anyone you care about, in a negative way?

No, my point is I think the article is actually arguing for more than just hobbyist networks. I think they ARE trying to reach non-technical users with this plan.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#67

Post by chrisco255 »

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…

Because he's the first president since Jimmy Carter not to start a new armed conflict? He negotiated middle east peace agreements between Israel and 4 or 5 other nations. He created Opportunity Zones for tax-incentivized investments in poor (often minority) neighborhoods. He increased funding to historically black colleges. He instituted prison reform to shorten sentences for non-violent offenders. If anything, people have been angry at him for not being enough of a medical dictator with the covid situation, meanwhile a lot of Democrat governors seem to have a predilection for banning churches, arresting small business owners, and instituting lockdowns. Left-wing social media has instituted strict anti-conservative censorship and deplatforming, in an attempt to influence the election. There's been no censorship from Trump. He's a blowhard, and sometimes an asshole, but he doesn't try to silence anyone. He's not locking people up in their houses. He's not un-personing anyone.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#68

Post by forgotmypw17 »

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,…

>why would this new internet end up any different?

I think the main advantage we have today is the hindsight of the past 25+ years.

>What would be different this time around if we started from scratch?

I think instead of one big Internet we'd build a bunch of smaller, trusted intranets, and provide controlled access via something like a web-of-trust system.

>You can't expect every person to be skilled enough (and with the time and desire) to be their own network administrator

It's up to your tribe/family/community to have its own networking person, and you can compensate any way that's agreeable to you.

Just like it's smart to have your own doctor and mechanic in the family, you should also have your own networking and computers person you can trust.

Many people complain about family coming to them for computer help and suggest that they should go to a "professional". I think this is an insensitve and unempathetic point of view. Where else would they go? Who else can be trusted to help them except you?

No, it's up to us to take care of all whom we care about, because no one else out there will do it for us. And if you shy away from this responsibility, your punishment will be watching family members get taken advantage of.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#69

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

cortesoft wrote: post #66
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I am wondering is why you would question such a (seemingly harmless) call to action. Particulary the last paragraph which simply suggests going forward people might spend less time focusing on learning programming and more time focusing on learning networking. If this "call to action" were to garner any traction, would it impact you personally, or anyone you care about, in a negative way?

No, my point is I think the article is actually arguing for more than just hobbyist networks. I think they ARE trying to reach non-technical users with this plan.

I did not get that impression as the author assumes some readers will be familiar with the "technical" history he describes. Granted, the blog as a whole does not have a necessarily technical focus. Even so, what is the harm if non-technical readers encounter this article.

Regarding creation of new networks, it seems your issue with this article applies more to this internet we are using right now. The one that you imply may have non-technical users reading about creating new networks for "technical" ones.

Re: Winning back the Internet by building our own

#70

Post by cocktailpeanuts »

dnautics wrote: post #62
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,…

> watching movies and show you didn’t pay for is theft When I have a bike and you steal it from me, you are depriving me of the use of that bicycle. That's what makes it theft. There is no deprival, therefore no theft in "watching something you didn't pay for". If you argue "you are depriving the right of the artist to make money" that makes the assumption that the right of an artist to coerce money out of the counte…

> When I have a bike and you steal it from me, you are depriving me of the use of that bicycle. That's what makes it theft.

Let me give you back your analogy with a dose of reality: When I make a living by selling bikes, and you steal it from me, you are depriving me of my time and energy and money spent to maintain my business. That's what makes it theft.

Post reply on HN