Create account

replied 1380d
But how is this an argument against using Signal?
replied 1380d
Not so much 'against' Signal
but more in favor of alternatives.
replied 1380d
Same thing isn't it. You may want to move away from TCP/IP and so on, as there are parts of it that are centralized (there must be much work done on this) but you do need a protocol
replied 1380d
True.
If your protocol is locked into predictable access patterns,
it is vuulnerable.
Matrix vulnerability is DNS.
But worse is the reliance upon centralized comm providers.
replied 1380d
I have not thought much about this really. Are even the basic problems for this type of mesh as a "replacement" of the relevant Internet protocols solved? I.e. DNS is hard to replace?
replied 1380d
A mesh just extends internet access.
It does not necessarily die when government shuts off the internet providers.
It is a decentralized replacement for your "Big-Bro" provider.
replied 1380d
Not necessarily, no, but if govt decrees the nodes illegal, they will not be hard to find and shut down. This is govt going far, but so is shutting down ISPs.
replied 1380d
Having been an "ISP provider" informs this:
shutting down ISPs is a dead easy 'Single Point of Failure'.
Killing community meshes can be much more difficult by orders of magnitude.
replied 1380d
I realize this. But the real problem in the west is political. If there is political will to shut down ISP's there is probably political will to seek and stop mesh nodes.
replied 1380d
ISPs have a central office and one guy to coerce.
Self-priced meshes such as what Althea envision have no such SPoF.
Shutting them down would require occupation _armies_.
replied 1380d
If you got some nationstate tech OK. If not, cheap drone strikes, the drone just follows the signal. Take out enough of it, and the question is, how do you replace the bombed hardware?
replied 1380d
It is easy enough to wire a mesh together with buried wires,
I have seen this done often enough.
Someone could sniff and bomb nodes
but that would quickly become very unpopular.
replied 1380d
Right now you can order it on the internet, but if someone is willing to take down ISPs, they are willing to stop international trade (except what they want of course).
replied 1380d
Pirates I have worked nearby over the years number in the thousands. "Stopping international trade" never stops them from getting what they want.
"Safe Distance" is necessary.
replied 1380d
So my problem has been that you seemed to take this lightly. I have brought up some concerns now, and I think going on would be fruitless. I definitely do not have a crystal ball
replied 1380d
I built many small community networks over the years.
Those days are behind me now,
someone else may carry on that trade.
All I can say is that yes it can be done.
replied 1380d
I do agree that if communities want to be networked and govt do not want to let them, distributed small hubs is the way to go (and hope govt will not put real effort in against them).
replied 1380d
At least if digital data transmission is a requirement. Btw, do you know if there are suitable commercial products for this kind of thing?
replied 1380d
For wifi+wired,
Ubiquiti was always my "goto solution",
but the best tech is always an evolving target.
I read recently they are still recommended.
replied 1380d
My thoughts on this are not very well organized. I had thought that wifi was too short range for this.
replied 1380d
ubiquiti airmax can do 50km+ easily.
replied 1380d
we had good long legs up to 35km,
but that took effort.
Far better to use short range mesh
than depend on long range bottlenecks.
Wifi is useful for short-leg mesh.
replied 1380d
I did some rudimentary checking myself, and found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FabFi and this http://www.broadband-hamnet.org/ from wikipedia.
replied 1380d
When-If I get some time I may re-examine.
the only interest I have now in such things
is for "Galt's Gulch" scenarios
replied 1380d
Well, now I think about it, I might have a crystal ball lying around somewhere, but that's a different matter