51–60 of 105 posts
https://reticulum.network/
We already had that, it was called crypto mining. Profit motive has taken care of that already
It's the most dumb article I have ever seen on Hackernews with respect to the writer who has knowledge about protocols and concepts. No TCP/IP means no normal internet routing. → You would need a totally new way for machines to find and send data to each other. Bots are not tied to HTTP/HTML forever, people can write new bots for the new protocol, including by the use of GUI automation (digital or with plotters that…
At least he got the premise right, if not the implementation. That is better than 50% of articles. :)
What ruined the internet was, quite frankly, non-nerdy people who caused the average intelligence of the internet to massively drop causing everything to be catered to LCD rather than assuming a basic competency.
Yes, everything needing to extract money is part of it but that wouldn't be as offensive if there was still alignment on demographics of the internet; nerds, geeks, and various outcasts.
The solution to this is community and admin self-policing. HN has accomplished this by having community buy-in that we aren't Reddit so any Reddit-esque jokes or low quality replies quite immediately get removed causing the behavior to get trained out of newbs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I really feel like accusing comments of being made by AI, especially with as little evidence as using an arrow, should be discouraged in the guidelines. It's become tediously common despite already falling under numerous more general items in that list.
If such a thing ever becomes big enough that money can be made, it will rot, and orders of magnitude faster than the current internet did. More than making the new stack non-interoperable with existing tech, you would have to make it non-interoperable with existing money. And then you're talking an even bigger revolution than a new internet. There's a kernel of interesting ideas here, but I don't think it pays due en…
> you would have to make it non-interoperable with existing money. Why? Just eliminate surveillance.. no tracking is no money. There's another theory that maybe no money is no content, but that's sort of what tfa (and other stuff on HN lately) is actually talking about. Lots of people who would make content or just conversation for free are still relying on some sense of community which is under attack everywhere if…
That’s a lot easier said than done.
Bloody hell. All the way down to TCP/IP? Listen, even getting myself fully IPv6 was a freaking adventure. This is dead in the water. I've gone so far as having a Gemini instance at gemini://g.wiki.roshangeorge.dev which no one has accessed. To be honest, I don't even understand the motivation. The Internet seems fine to me. The protocols in use here are quite nice and there's always Gemini if you want a protocol that…
If nobody else knows then they might not access, but I looked; at least some of the parts looks like interesting to me.
> The protocols in use here are quite nice and there's always Gemini if you want a protocol that is pure document oriented.
As well as others, depending on what you want to do; it is not quite as simple as "pure document oriented" (e.g. Gemini does have inputs (1x status code) and TLS as well, including authentication with client certificates).
> Perhaps a HTTP browser that only `Accept`s `text/markdown`
It might also be made to be modular so that the file formats and other features can be added separately (including HTTP, HTML, Unicode, etc also would not be forcibly built-in, and the different protocols, file formats, character sets, and other features can be done by adding them on (which can be static or dynamic; static might allow some possible optimizations but would require recompiling and/or relinking it when you want to change it)).
If such a thing ever becomes big enough that money can be made, it will rot, and orders of magnitude faster than the current internet did. More than making the new stack non-interoperable with existing tech, you would have to make it non-interoperable with existing money. And then you're talking an even bigger revolution than a new internet. There's a kernel of interesting ideas here, but I don't think it pays due en…
> you would have to make it non-interoperable with existing money. Why? Just eliminate surveillance.. no tracking is no money. There's another theory that maybe no money is no content, but that's sort of what tfa (and other stuff on HN lately) is actually talking about. Lots of people who would make content or just conversation for free are still relying on some sense of community which is under attack everywhere if…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least he got the premise right, if not the implementation. That is better than 50% of articles. :)
The premise being that the root cause of walled gardens, enshittification, data trading etc. is IP ? Get outa here ...
I also feel like if you're going to invent a new internet from first principles, how are you going to not end up with the current one? (or a shitty version of it)
The answer might be an invite tree as the article suggests. They might be hoping for too much user quality from the invite tree, or at least hoping for a level of user quality that would only work at a small scale. Rather than "zany founders, reclusive poets, eccentric engineers of all kinds, high school teachers, homegrown philosophers, garage tinkerers, and beloved drug-addled futurist artists", imo to include a lot of people a simple invite tree would get you "not a literal bot". Trying to actually evaluate user quality gets you into moderation, federation, it is not easy. You could keep it small, but that's not an Internet replacement, that's a private forum, which as the author says they already have.
Imo a good start would be the much narrow problem of identifying your device as not a bot when browsing. Something like google fraud defense https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48039362 except instead of a google owning your identity, some sort of user tree where you can vouch anonymously for people you know, and ban users and users who added them for scraping.