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

121–130 of 353 posts

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

#121

Post by fc417fc802 »

em-bee wrote: post #110
Almondsetat wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your implication? This app is not for talking across the globe with people.

but the internet is for talking to people across the globe. and the app presents itself as an alternative for internet based apps. the reality is however that in any place where i can't use the internet, this app does not really solve that problem. it is only useful in situations where in most cases the alternative is talking face to face. it's not any situation where the internet can't be used, but just some of them…

I believe bitchat can also use the wider internet to exchange messages. So it is an app that can use either the internet or various other more local options. That seems like a desirable improvement to me.

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

#122

Post by nubinetwork »

Considering that my Bluetooth headset disconnects when I even think about looking at my microwave, I can't trust Bluetooth any further than 10 feet...

If you want kilometers of range in wide open air, give anything lora based a try.

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

#123

Post by fc417fc802 »

ifwinterco wrote: post #86
maqp wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So other users are broadcasting messages of third parties onwards? How many devices does it take to saturate the channel? What does this do for phone battery?

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.

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

#124

Post by fc417fc802 »

j1elo wrote: post #35

What are good file transfer apps that can be used in similar scenarios? (to be clear about the usage model: communications on a plane ) * I see LocalSend and LANDrop frequently suggested on HN but in my experience they rely on having a central Wifi router. No good. * Android's QuickShare comes included by default, but it's buggy. Just yesterday it failed on me (I'm on an uncommunicated boat): it was defaulting to Blu…

Unfortunately most P2P wireless solutions are likely to be somewhat buggy, at least in my experience. WiFi and Bluetooth chipsets are often "quirky". I will often lose the ability to ssh into my laptop across WiFi until I go to the laptop and poke the network from it. KDEConnect often temporarily loses sight of my phone, yet it still reports being connected to WiFi. Stuff like that.

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

#125

Post by immibis »

repelsteeltje wrote: post #90
immibis wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are.

That depends on where your live (and when), but: Protest is the cornerstone of democracy and in general you shouldn't need permission to organize a demonstration. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/can-democracy-exist-witho...

Name three currently existing democracies. USA is out (protests illegal), Europe is out (protests require registration which is denied for anything that has a risk of effecting change), the Middle East and Asia are out for obvious reasons. Maybe there's a democracy somewhere in Africa?

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

#126

Post by immibis »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #117
Y_Y wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer voting. I find protests annoying. They're a good way for people to let off steam, hang out with friends, get photos for the international press etc. but they're not the right mechanism for finding out what the people want. They're definitely effective when most of the country wants the government out, but by that point a vote would certainly do just as well, and with fewer flying bricks.

Protests can serve as an implied threat if the government is gaming the election process. They're certainly preferable to a riot or a coup attempt in that scenario. They also serve to draw attention to issues that aren't showing up on the ballot for whatever reason. The system doesn't always work in an ideal way. To that end protests are supposed to be annoying to those who don't care.

Which is why they're illegal. Governments don't like being threatened.

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

#127

Post by throwaway82113 »

trueno wrote: post #83
nicois wrote: post #26

One missing feature: deferred message propagation. As far as I understand, while messages will be rebroadcast until a TTL is exhausted, there is no mechanism to retain in-transit messages and retransmit them to future peers. While this adds overheads, it's table stakes for real-life usage. You should be able to write a message and not rely on the recipient being available when you press send. You should also be able…

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

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

#128

Post by jojobas »

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.

When your Ayatollah decides to shut down internet and you are near people you don't really know in an urban environment?

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

#130

Post by kozika »

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.

Now that Wi-Fi Aware is supported on iOS, I think supporting it should significantly expand the transmission range.
Post reply on HN