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

A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

bitchat.free

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 353 posts

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#131

Post by n4r9 »

throwaway82113 wrote: post #127
trueno wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that is a super good callout. this is prob the 100th time ive read about bitchat here, and the comments are largely the same (use briarchat, none of these really work that well, i dont like jack dorsey, etc) every time. but this is interesting. and i agree strongly with this: "While this adds overheads, it's table stakes for real-life usage." i suppose events like iran are really making me wonder if this stuff is pos…

Lack of retention can actually be a feature in these types of situations. It should be opt-in. The government would actually need to infiltrate the network in order to read the conversations, instead of just retrieving the messages from the cache on a confiscated phone

> The government would actually need to infiltrate the network in order to read the conversations

If I understand correctly, this would still be true if the recipient is connected.

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#132

Post by wongarsu »

throwaway82113 wrote: post #127
trueno wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that is a super good callout. this is prob the 100th time ive read about bitchat here, and the comments are largely the same (use briarchat, none of these really work that well, i dont like jack dorsey, etc) every time. but this is interesting. and i agree strongly with this: "While this adds overheads, it's table stakes for real-life usage." i suppose events like iran are really making me wonder if this stuff is pos…

Lack of retention can actually be a feature in these types of situations. It should be opt-in. The government would actually need to infiltrate the network in order to read the conversations, instead of just retrieving the messages from the cache on a confiscated phone

I'd consider end-to-end encryption to also be table-stakes, at least opportunistically after the first message in each direction. With encryption cached messages are far less harmful (though still leaking very useful metadata), without encryption it seems almost trivial to spy on any communications

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#133

Post by ellis0n »

maqp wrote: post #9

Could someone please explain in what situation do you use a BlueTooth messaging app? Like, even BT5 range won't exceed 400 meters. What good is this? You're not going to send images to journalists from protests with it (you'd do wisely to keep it in airplane mode until you get home and then you'd upload them to their securedrop or whatever), and you don't need off-band security to let the kids know it's dinner time.

I have seen a test of bitchat using radio communication over a distance of more than 5 km. There were also other methods to extend BT range.

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#134

Post by ifwinterco »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #123
ifwinterco wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but messages can be encrypted so relaying parties can't read them. And yes, it would have an effect on battery and have very limited bandwidth compared to whatsapp (no sharing videos etc). Like I said definitely not practical for messaging but I think something along these lines is how airtags work?

> definitely not practical for messaging Text based messaging ala IRC? Just how quickly and how much do you type? A few hundred KiB exchanged between nodes only every 10 seconds or so ought to be able to accommodate thousands of simultaneous users in most scenarios. The impact on battery life should be far less than using a bluetooth headset.

Sorry I should be clearer: I think it actually might be feasible in a high population density area and if everyone uses it, but because of the limited range of bluetooth you really do need a high density of active nodes for it to work reliably.

A messaging system that often takes hours or days to get messages to the receiver is fairly useless and people will continue to prefer centralised systems, so there's a severe chicken-and-egg problem to solve there before anything like this can work

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#135

Post by throwawayheui57 »

throwaway758439 wrote: post #114
behnamoh wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Iran right now... Internet shut down while the regime keeps slaughtering people at the order of 4x9/11.

Internet is exploited by US as a tool for regime change [1] in coordination with sponsored on the ground terrorism. [1] [1] Washington’s War on Iran: The Importance of Defending Information Space https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiJm4zwZZHY

Hey if anyone wants know exactly what Iranian state TV spews every day on national TV, look no further. Very faithful to the source material. Totally trustworthy.

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#136

Post by IshKebab »

lxgr wrote: post #103
maqp wrote: post #9

Could someone please explain in what situation do you use a BlueTooth messaging app? Like, even BT5 range won't exceed 400 meters. What good is this? You're not going to send images to journalists from protests with it (you'd do wisely to keep it in airplane mode until you get home and then you'd upload them to their securedrop or whatever), and you don't need off-band security to let the kids know it's dinner time.

Bluetooth 5 introduced "coded PHY", which allows ranges of over 1 km in ideal conditions. As I understand it, adding support for this wouldn't even require new hardware for most recent phones. The real obstacles here are political, not technical, as evidenced by the complete absence of any built-in solution that could be so useful in both everyday life (messaging a family member on the same plane when sitting separat…

Huh I didn't know about that. Seems like it uses 8 symbols per bit to increase the range (but I would very seriously doubt you ever get close to 1km except in super ideal "both in a field in the middle of nowhere" scenarios that never actually happen.

Apparently it's an optional part of Bluetooth 5, so not necessarily supported. However I just checked my phone (Pixel 8) and it is supported. You can check in the nRF Connect app.

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#137

Post by fc417fc802 »

ifwinterco wrote: post #134
fc417fc802 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> definitely not practical for messaging Text based messaging ala IRC? Just how quickly and how much do you type? A few hundred KiB exchanged between nodes only every 10 seconds or so ought to be able to accommodate thousands of simultaneous users in most scenarios. The impact on battery life should be far less than using a bluetooth headset.

Sorry I should be clearer: I think it actually might be feasible in a high population density area and if everyone uses it, but because of the limited range of bluetooth you really do need a high density of active nodes for it to work reliably. A messaging system that often takes hours or days to get messages to the receiver is fairly useless and people will continue to prefer centralised systems, so there's a severe…

There's no reason a mesh network can't use an internet connection as a transport when it's available. Moreover a P2P capable mesh can even make use of a centralized server in such scenarios. At the end of the day it's "just" a message routing and delivery problem.

When I enable WiFi calling on my phone that doesn't preclude it connecting to a cell tower.

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#138

Post by trueno »

throwaway82113 wrote: post #127
trueno wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that is a super good callout. this is prob the 100th time ive read about bitchat here, and the comments are largely the same (use briarchat, none of these really work that well, i dont like jack dorsey, etc) every time. but this is interesting. and i agree strongly with this: "While this adds overheads, it's table stakes for real-life usage." i suppose events like iran are really making me wonder if this stuff is pos…

Lack of retention can actually be a feature in these types of situations. It should be opt-in. The government would actually need to infiltrate the network in order to read the conversations, instead of just retrieving the messages from the cache on a confiscated phone

> instead of just retrieving the messages from the cache on a confiscated phone

why wouldn't encryption be a part of recipe here rendering government acquisition of such a cache moot?

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#139

Post by ddtaylor »

I am using Briar and Session right now for this.

Jack makes cool stuff, but I fell off BlueSky and I have little desire to engage with the "community" on there. It's very echo-chambery like every social media and I feel it's mostly identical to X or Truth just a different echo chamber. It seemed like BlueSky was being sold as a solution to what happened with Twitter and I feel like it didn't make true on it's promise.

Re: A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

#140

Post by trueno »

jagermo wrote: post #3

I don't know. I do not like Jack Dorey's involvement. Not a big fan of his. I'd rather use Briar ( https://briarproject.org/ )

I personally don't care if its bitchat or briar, I care about the most effective proven implementation in the end. Such a technology is needed now, not later, and if if bitchat started out as dorseys vibe coded side project last year and has now grown into something greater, then so be it.
Post reply on HN