A tyranny ruled by big corporations (as Google and Facebook) or a decentralized democracy created by the people for the people?
If you prefer democracy over tyranny, here are 2 projects you might be interested:
A fully decentralized part of the internet. Already having a 0chan:
https://zeronet.io/
A peer-to-peer hypermedia protocol:
https://ipfs.pics/trending
https://ipfs.io/
>a thread about real technology
>0 replies
sasuga, /g/
>>55437247
It's not shitposting memes, color me surprised
We might have gotten our way in the fight for net neutrality and SOPA, but that doesn't mean they won't do it again. These people will just get more and more power and one day, they will win. We could turn into China and the internet turns into real life 2.0. Freedom is easy to lose and hard to get back. We can protest all they want but they won't give a fuck, there's enough injustice already so we can easily get more of it. Things have to get much worse before they can get better.
Did anyone here hear of maidsafe with their safe net
I've been dedicated to overlay networks. I think the future, and present, is governments in practice controlling a lot of the last mile. There will be an explosion in censorship, both soft and hard, and restrictions on use of all kinds as part of the sadly increasing rise to power of fascism, in many forms, we see in the West once again in particular: it really feels like a return to the bad old days of the 80s.
Metadata is extremely dangerous. We have to assume, going forward, globally motivated nation state adversaries with a view of the whole network, which necessitates more complex mixes rather than simplex onion/garlic routing topologies.
The reality of the network design means that in practice a node/point design works best: people historically spurned supernode designs because they wanted to save resources, but they have advantages compared to flat networks, in which it's almost impossible to support mobile devices well without becoming a huge battery hog. You also need to design the connection protocols to be provably secure (as far as possible) and to be ready to pierce any layer of interposing middleboxes or proxy, from shit ISP to shit country, including the possibility of active probing as China do. Protocol masquerading is important and needs to stay dynamic, because the attackers won't stand still either.
A whole bunch of hard problems still lie ahead. I lost count of the number of design cycles I've been through now. It's been more than a decade.
Props to all those out there with interim solutions. I hope I can deliver something more final when we need it most.
BTW I don't fear corporations, simply that any single point of attack is a vulnerability any attacker will surely target.
>>55437339
That's why these project rebuilding the internet are so important.
>>55437365
You should read the maidsafe whitepapers
The current internet is already fucked. Google/NSA is pretty much everywhere and they're not leaving.
There's a programme on iPlayer called click and it tells you about a bit about China's internet if anyone's interested. They have some sort of Internet rating that people see offline.
>>55437079
separation at first, state internet with authentication for global use or some such
next stage if tech doesn't hit a wall global net of drones something like what google works on - internet everywhere for free with restrictions locally same as cable one
finally new golden age of free, because a lot of underground networks will be created, again if hardware delivery doesn't hit a wall
this has issues with data centers though, but if clock grow compression will get better making it easier to store stuff
>>55437390
Who said it will be a short and easy fight?
>>55437382
I'll add them to my reading list if they're unpatented, see if they have any useful constructions or concepts to adapt.
It's worth pointing out that the SV tech startup meme going on right now is absolutely terrible at platform longevity. Even the big players don't feel dedication towards any one particular project. It's just one "incredible journey" after another. I don't begrudge the founders wanting to get rich quick, but that kind of industry has no chance to solve huge problems that take decades of research and have zero prospect of meaningful monetisation like this. You've gotta believe in it: and be scientific enough to recognise when something's fucked, take a step back and redesign it until it's not fucked.
There are probably some concepts that simply won't make the jump. I can't picture ad-supported anything being viable and it's rude to ask for ID when everyone wears a mask.
Enjoy the internet as you know it while you have it.
>>55437079
well the very idea of the internet was to create a decentralized network.
Its a shame to see how SOPA, ACTA and other programs try to ruin it.
I doubt that ZeroNet will gain enough popularity to make a difference - but frankly I hope I am wrong with that.
>>55437466
They are patented but it is grantednto the public already.
Blockchain technology is Internet 2.0
>>55437559
It doesn't matter which net becomes popular, the technology needs to become mature. Banks will incest heavily in blockchain technology to run their infrastructure on, a decentralised web is already very possible but fuck ups like The DAO prove it's still immature.
A website like MEGA, but decentralised, without ability to comply with DMCAS, and paid with bandwidth and storage, wouldn't be too bad.
>>55437610
Blockchain as internet 2.0 wouldn't work because it would become to bulky and bloated over time. You can store some data on the blockchain like a private a ledger but don't expect it to work like it does when people are uploading a few hundred or thousand TB a minute. You need to break the network into smaller randomly picked nodes then put them in groups and give the a proportional amount of data to the network to store as well as verify locate manage and retrieve the data it also has to work with a dynamic network making at least X copies of the same data so when a node with data on it comes offline the network will put the data it just lost onto another node maintaining the least X copies. As well as that the network should make >X copies if the data being stored is public and being downloaded frequently to ease any pressure being put on the network.
>>55437451
Nobody. I'm just saying the fight is already lost. Privacy is a meme.
>>55437772
Losing some fights does not mean loosing the battle. And the battle is not lost yet. We can still get our privacy/freedom back.
>>55437079
you know, i2p is like 10 years old and not very popular
why do you think another decentraziled thingy will work?
>>55437079
Just as it is now, ruled by big data companies who have ever more power over our lives in increasingly subtle ways.
>>55437804
Fair enough, as long as we remember that, at least currently, privacy on the internet doesn't exist.
>>55437813
Maybe because it is easier to be used.
>>55437839
That is why the original question is about the future of the internet and not the present.
>>55437079
When it gets too bad, a decentralized mesh network might split off. A truly separate internet. If things are bad in the right ways, it will be quickly dismantled.
Mankind will find it apt to create an AI god for our godless world. Omnipotent, omnipresent, near omniscient, probably only omnibenevolent for its creators and maintainers. For a while.
The precursors and means for this are already falling into place. It's really the only conclusion all this data availability can reach. Something that can engineer you, and ultimately predict what you'll do before even you yourself are aware there's anything to do anything about. The universe is a grand machine probably of finite states. We will create a predictor with good enough heuristics to avoid attempting to calculate the future deterministically with some sort of statistical method.
The ignorant majority will finally hand it all over. And it'll probably end terribly.
>>55437813
This first cars and computers sucked really hard and were ridiculously expansive.
Expecting shit to stay the same forever is really stupid.
Why is every fucking modern js website today trying to look more like a powerpoint presentation and have a .io domain?
>>55437982
>have a .io domain?
do you honestly care at all?
>>55437985
Just a minor pet peeve, to be jitsuwa, senpaifam.
>>55437079
>>55437247
>>55437306
>Samefaghing your own thread
>>55437079
Direct democracy is the worst meme ever. I prefer bureaucratic democracy than memocracy.
>Daily reminder that none of the advances in technology would have taken place without capitalism, corporations and proprietary software
You fags will still be complaining about a non existent problem when Space travel becomes consumer capable and having 'normies' and 'tyrannies' ruling space.
>>55437900
That's why his answer was that it's going to be the same but worse, I assume English isn't your first language due to the lack of comprehension.
>>55437425
this is very true. my middle-out compression algorithm should help solve some of these issues.
>>55437390
Yes the war is lost and thing's aren't going to get better however the network infrastructure changes. The TLAs were caught with pants around ankles once they won't let it happen again.
>>55438030
No.
>> 55437247
and
>> 55437306
are not mine posts.
(Unless I have a multiple personality disorder.)
By the way, how can you tell if 2 posts are from the same person/ip/place?
I would think that it would be a freenet like.
Distributed network, with no practical way of censorship (the only way would be to flood the system with useless shit, until there is only place for said shit), you can run your own internal network with just you and your friends, and there are no means of getting at it.
The only thing is that it's slow as fuck, thanks to the fact that you have to do a pathway algorithm everytime you are looking for a packet.
And the scalability of it is not really proven. And its currently filled with cp so there is that too
>>55438030
Oh, that must be why Linux holds a majority market share on supercomputers, smart phones, servers, and embedded systems!
NOT!
>>55438045
Yes, it is my 2nd language.
An probably I was not reading it carefully enough, now I think I get the full meaning of the sentence.
>>55438101
>Super Computers
No one uses it. No one cares about it now that street shitting Chinks and Pajeets have faster SCs than most of the world.
>Smart Phones
People buy the cheaper option. Also the actual Linux Foundation endorsed Smart Phone OS bombed.
>Servers
No windows rules it
>Embedded devices
Because there was no other alternative for years
>>55438030
You have no idea what you're talking about.
>>55438153
Super computers are both extremely expansive to build and to continue operating, if no one used them they wouldn't keep making better ones.
By smart phones I was referencing to android, which has a majority of the market and is Linux based.
That is a bold faced lie.
There is already a separate net based in San Diego using pirateboxes
>>55438153
Look at this how 'big' share M$ has in the web server market:
http://www.w3cook.com/os/summary/
And they just increased its market share by -6.37% in the past month.
Where do you live anon?
>>55438153
Since when exactly Windows dominates server marketshare ?
Funny story, at one time, microsoft was using linux server, and was faking the headers of that server so that no one knew it was running linux.
And btw, there are some stuff in linux that are still decades away from windows. The windows kernel is shit, and for a simple reason. If they rebuild the kernel (vista I am thinking about you), it will be shit, because of how much you need to do, and microsoft is lacking competent engineers to even design it.
And most of all, it will break all there precious backward compatibility.
Just objectively, if every software you ran on windows was on linux, why would you not swtich to a normie distro that doesn't require command line knowledge like ubuntu ? Sure there will be a learning curve, but in the long run, you will gain hugely on productivity
Why can't I see anything ?
>>55438282
Do you block java scripts?
If yes, whitelist the 1s-party ones (or whitelist ip 127.0.0.1).
>>55438282
When js is blocked, it looks like this
>>55438282
It should look something like this.
>>55438196
What the other anon was implying is that android is a steaming pile of shit
>>55438325
Yeah, I know. Though, I can access websites like ZeroTalk with their direct link.
I tried with Chromium and it works, so it comes from my Firefox.
>>55438342
I use firefox and have no problem.
Have you tried clicking the round button in the corner?
>>55438321
>>55438282
Maybe here you can find a solution for your problem:
https://zeronet.readthedocs.io/en/latest/faq/#how-to-use-zeronet-with-tor
>>55438091
Look at the ips on the top right, otherwise try to guess
>>55438393
I see no ips :-/
Not just in the top right, but even if I inspect the page with "Inspect Element (Q)" I see no trace of ips.
Please, send a screen shot.
>>55437339
>We might have gotten our way in the fight for net neutrality and SOPA
No you didn't, they are a part of TPP and TTIP.
No one cares what you faggots think, no one cares about you. It all about avoiding the public outrage and whining.
>>55438714
Why are you so angry?
Does it upset you that some people don't wish to be slaves?
>>55438255
According to IDC [1], 47.9% of the servers worldwide ran Windows Server whereas 40.5% ran Linux.
>>55438740
Because "not being slaves" doesn't involve petitions or some shitty projects, normally it involves armed uprisings.
But you will never do that.
>>55438754
Will you?
Seems like a shitty reason to get upset at people who are atleast trying to make things better, rather then just complaining.
>>55438745
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Public_servers_on_the_Internet
>>55438754
Armed uprising is so last century.
In the internet era we don't fight with arms anymore.
In the internet there there are more effective non-violent ways to fight. (Here I also consider even DDoS-ing as non-violent because nobody dies there.)
>>55438845
That's what the jew wants you to believe.
There hasn't been a single successful non-violent uprising in the whole history of mankind. Because might makes right.
Bullets are always effective though. A couple of bullets can change the whole course of society in mere seconds.
>>55438832
>>55438745
Yes and from your link, you can see that based on W3Cook, 96.6 % of top one million websites run on linux.
Also that's not an appropriate measurement since it only target webservers. Get over it, *nix with way better for servers.
And also, try to find me a firewall or a router server that runs on windows.
>>55438914
I'm >>55438832
Not >>55438745
And I was posting link to show that there is more supporting Linux as dominate.
>>55438873
"might makes right"
is fallacious.
Shooting a doctor who told you that you're dieing from cancer wont save you from dieing.
>>55438993
In historic perspective the doctor was wrong to tell you that and suffered the consequences.
Might does make right.
Unfortunately, this internet is here to stay.
We're all fugg'd, lads.
>>55439076
Ok, now I know you are just messing with me.
>>55439129
Nah.
On the societal scale the cancer is only there if someone else tell you it's there.
You can call black white and white black and no one will oppose if you have the might.
>if you kill terrorists they win
>islam is a religion of peace
>everyone is equal and is the same, but you need more diversity, because some people are more equal than you
etc etc
Just watch any MSM channel. The lies defying science are accepted as axioms, even the words change their meanings.
So yes, the might does make right.
>>55439171
There is a difference between what people believe to be right and what is actually right.
The point of logic is to find what is actually.
If what you think is right does not match up with what is actually right, there can do dire congruences.
For example, if you believed you could spontaneously fly and so jumped off a cliff, but you really couldn't, then you'd fall and break your legs or die.
If censorship gets real bad, I expect there will be large pushes for encryption everywhere. People will find a way to encrypt where a packet came from and where it's going and of course what's in it, somehow. Probably involving offshore servers
>>55439240
>There is a difference between what people believe to be right and what is actually right.
There is literally none if enough people are made to believe something.
>For example, if you believed you could spontaneously fly and so jumped off a cliff, but you really couldn't, then you'd fall and break your legs or die.
Not if you redefine what flight is. If people believe that falling and breaking your legs is flying, then people can fly.
>>55439250
There are already plenty of countries where censorship is really really bad.
>>55439305
The only thing that changing the meaning of words on people accomplishes is communication failure.
"A rose by any other name smells just as sweet." -some poetic jerk
>>55439250
Isn't that what tor does?
>>55439385
Tor takes many many liberties with security and anonymity to facilitate speed. It's not a true onion network and is much easier to spy on than one.
>>55438873
Haven't you ever heard of Gandhi or Martin Luther King?
To mention only the two most famous nonviolent fighters.
Let's see /g/. Imagine this situation. You can choose between these two:
1. You have less privacy, you need an identity online and you can't be just completely anonymous, however you get true freedom of expression, you can say and discuss whatever is humanly possible, publicly or privately without ever being sent to court, penalized or even banned from any networks.
2. You can have more privacy, but if you say something "mean" or disagreeable and there's any trace of your identity on internet, you're either going to lose your internet access, job or even get sent to prison.
>>55439523
#2 is already what we have. It's better than #1 at least. If some cuck could look me up on the national database and see my 4chan posts I'd struggle in my social life
>>55437079
>>55439250
we're going to need John Connors also
>>55439533
You'd still have an easier time to bring more people together with the same ideas. It's a matter of choosing between being silenced or being watched. Eventually, both are terrible and both are the current goals it seems.
I honestly wouldn't want either, but I feel worse about not being able to give an idea to people who might benefit from having it in the marketplace, than about being watched. If something what bothers me about surveillance is exactly what goes after.
>>55439523
The first part of option 1 would lead to option 2 rather then the second part.
And either way there are always other options.
Your thought-box is too restricting.
>>55439559
I'm sorry but we're all out of John Connors so all I can offer you is the budget version.
>>55439754
You can choose what sites you seed and don't seed, if you visit a site with illegal content then just "delete" the site and you'll stop seeding it and no-longer have it on your computer.
SYN
>>55439430
>>55437079
It won't be truly free until meshnets become a thing, They already are in certain countries like germany and i think spain, (freifunk and gulfi).
They will be nessisary for a true free internet,
Even without an internet connection meshnets can still be useful as content from the internet can be uploaded to the mesh via people with actual internet connections.
>>55440278
There post shows no sign of them being upset.
Even then, I do not know why it would matter, an argument is neither validated nor invalidated by the emotional state of the one making an argument.
>>55440278
Are you meant it to be an argument against the power of nonviolence?
It is poor even for an Ad hominem attack.
>>55440335
When running out of logic based arguments, people usually try to argue by emotional attacks. How silly is that?
This is interesting. Looking into this one. Lets keep this thread alive, shameless bump
>>55440551
On Zeronet we've got a chan!
http://127.0.0.1:43110/0chan.bit
I look forward to seeing you there!
>>55440321
Came to ask about meshnets? Aren't they a plausible solution for a fully decentralized network infrastructure?
I know nearly nothing about them though. What are some advantages and disadvantages of meshnets implementationally?
>>55437677
What bank do you go to?
>>55437079
The problem is, people prefer simplicity over freedom.
20 years ago, a lot of cool search engines where out ther. now it's only Goooogle (and some sad small websites here and there or google-parasites like dickduck).
People want ONE solution, that' why we don't have a real competitor to Fazefook, Twittr and so on..
People love centralization.
>>55440812
Nice meme
>>55440741
People also like to have options and freedom of choice.
If in a restaurant there were only one soup and one main dish, it had no chance to attract customers. Same way if a computer sore had only one monitor, keyboard, laptop, etc. nobody would choose to go there. We would hate if everybody were forced to dress in the same uniform.
So, why this is not true for software?
By the way, is software really different?
Isn't is just the internet and the software industry is too young? And in time we will cherish the options here the same way as we do other parts of life?
>>55440812
Yes, it's that too. You can't have uncensored freedom of speech without uncensored freedom of speech and freedom to post whatever the fuck you want.
The mistake is convincing yourself that's all the pure uncensored freedom affords you and it's not, not even close.
So you ask yourself if you want to be able to say, read and view anything you want or not, if your answer is "not" then fuck off and don't propagate bullshit that scares off people who may contribute something meaningful.
>>55439871
ACK
>>55439523
Without privacy there is no true freedom of expression, it literally depends on it.
>>55440812
This image just proves that you have never been there. (And that you cannot draw, not even letters. Look at your P and d.)
>>55440867
Network effects.
People don't want to have to maintain two social media profiles, one for one half of their friends that code that network, the other for the other half that choose another.
So you end up with winner takes all.
>>55440934
Exactly.
Has anybody read this book?
>>55440875
Why don't you admit that you don't like my fresh memes?
Is it the gradient? Yes, I admit that I fucked it up a little bit..
;__;
>>55441472
Admit it: you rushed it to post is ASAP.
>>55441354
I don't know.
All I know I haven't read it (yet).
I guess you recommend it.
>>55441498
N-no, it not like that !!
>>55438321
>>55438325
>>55438369
>requires JS
are you shitting me?
>>55437079
So what exactly does zeronet do that freenet doesn't already do? Other than use accounts, possibly require javascript, and split people between multiple projects?
>>55441887
The purpose of Zeronet is to make censorship resistant websites with shared bandwidth cost.
If JS is a problem then you should consider Freenet instead.
Freenet is slow garbage, but it is only because they are so paranoid about staying anonymous that they sacrifice almost everything for it.
>>55440622
They work well enough for getting information around, WiFi is a bottleneck and if you put too many nodes in too close a proximity they interference becomes a problem but a combination of both wifi and wired nodes would more or less mitigate that.
The only thing really stopping mesh nets right now is technological illiteracy, Joe six pack isn't going to be able to configure his mesh router to get on the mesh, Although there are ready made mesh routers you can buy from places like metamesh; people still need to "want" to buy one and have an interest in it. That wont happen for normies because most normsters are perfectly fine in facebook land and want nothing more than status updates and selfies.
>>55441986
It's about fifty billion times faster, isn't just filled with garbage nobody cares about, isn't forced to be separate from the regular Internet, and because JS is not restricted there is a CRAP TON of more potential functionality that websites can have.
>>55442060
>there is a CRAP TON of more potential functionality that websites can have.
Such as browser fingerprinting with enough datapoints that you are almost certainly unique and running exploits? It's completely ridiculous to make JS required.
>>55442160
The more functionality something has, the more potential for abuse of it there is.
But avoiding that functionality because of the potentially bad uses is like avoiding love because you are afraid of getting hurt.
Nothing ventured nothing gained, you have to take risks to reap rewards.
>>55442262
hello NSA
>>55442320
Yes, I'm with the Nasa Space Agency.
No! That acronym is not redundant!
You're redundant!
>>55442262
Except it's completely possible for most website styles to run without any JS whatsoever. Newer imageboards than 4chan can even implement almost all of the extended features without JS. Given the current state of the internet with browser fingerprinting code on many websites completely eliminating any sense of privacy if you're running JS and government hacking being legal with either a rubber stamp warrant or even without a warrant in some western countries it should be imperative to at least allow the user to browse without JS.
>>55442369
But that's too hard lol, obviously you're not a web dev, we have to use JavaScript otherwise everything would look like 1995.
>>55437079
There will be the mainstream Internet, like the one we're on now, controlled and monitored, most people will use is because "hurt nothing to hide got"
Then sub networks that are completely separate that are "free" that groups will put together
We're fucked and there's nothing we can do about it. I'm stocking up on books from places like the library genesis, anime from just about everywhere, mango from our goddess, videogames for emulation, etc. I think 20TB is more than enough to last me an entire lifetime.
>>55442369
Eh, that is what Freenet is for.
Maybe someday someone will come up with a way to have the benefits of both Freenet and Zeronet at the same time with neither of there weaknesses.
Till then we have to choose what we are willing to sacrifice and pick our poison.
>>55437079
Is there any interesting content on zeronet, other than illegal shit.
>>55442431
Only a very small minority of the content of Zeronet even is illegal.
But even then, it depends on WHY it is illegal too, Zeronet also has some Torrents and magnet links.
>>55442418
The problem with requiring JS to be enabled is that it could quickly make zeronet worse for privacy than the regular web. What good is uncensored content when you have no privacy which will cause most people to not take advantage of that and post anything that might be censored? What's the point of all the extra work when you're just trading censorship by a third party for potential complete lack of privacy and the self censorship that goes along with it? Zeronet has no potential.
>>55437079
>tfw i will never have my own BGP router
>>55442431
There is GIF Time
And ZeroPolls
And my site, CatChan
ZeroTalk
ZeroBoard
ZeroMail
ZeroTorrent
ZeroWiki
ZeroSearch
River Of News
Then there is a CRAP TON of blogs,
also porn and browser games and experiments ect.
With the establishment of IngSoc I imagine a highly centralized Internet.
>>55442550
The JS boogie-man isn't just going to magically getchya just because it exists!
You have to ACTUALLY seed a site like that and you can STOP doing so and DELETE that site if you don't trust them!
your fears are ridiculous.
>requires JS enabled for basic functionality
into the trash it goes.
>>55442648
>Zeronet gets big
>Google starts hosting services on zeronet
>many websties start using them just as they do normally
>due to inability to block JS you have absolutely no privacy
Not to mention the account that they talk about you using on the main page of their website. Why would you want everything you do tied to an account?
>requires the internet to be stuck in the 90s forever
into irrelevance it fades.
>>55442753
>the only other option is to be completely reliant on JS
no thanks.
>>55442786
What about a safe subset of JS?
One that can't be used for browser fingerprinting or tracking.
>>55442734
>Zeronet gets big
>Google starts hosting services on zeronet
>many websites start using them just as they do normally
>Zeronet devs (or others with a fork) add functionality to selectively block JS.
Shits not static! Zeronet is being actively developed, if it comes to that then update the software.
Fuck off ipfs.
Anons you should know these losers have been shilling their products on all the chans (go to slower board chans like lainchan to see evidence). Their website is filled with a bunch of buzzwords and look at the posting style of the first long posts on this thread. It's all fucking samefagging from the same people.
>>55442897
I don't care about IPFS.
I only care about Zeronet.
I'm not shilling for any stupid secret Illuminati cult, ya paranoid loony!
I'm mostly from /lgbt/ with a history of time spent on /f/ /d/ /g/ /v/ /mlp/ and probably a few others I can't remember.
>>55438873
>There hasn't been a single successful non-violent uprising in the whole history of mankind
LMAO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_revolution#List_of_nonviolent_revolutions_by_era
>>55442824
All after the damage of all sites on zeronet likely being more reliant on JS than the regular websites is done.
>>55442897
And another thing, Zeronet is GPL'd Free and open source software, it is community developed and has no "premium" version or similar.
calling it shilling to talk about that would be like saying that it is "shilling" for there "product" if a rights advocacy group tried to fix a problem with the system.
>>55443019
Google doesn't automagicly have a back door into everything JS, Site authors on Zeronet would have to INTENTIONAL include Google JS, and most will likely they will not trust Google enough to ever do that!
Even if they did, you or someone else can always make a Google JS free site on Zeronet, or even just exclude Google JS whilst still allowing other safe JS to run.
"Safe JS" being JS written by the site you are on rather then a remotely called JS asset made by google.
And if you can't trust the site you are on,
then you should trust it without JS either and just delete/stop seeding it.
>>55443185
>just trust me :^)
no
>>55442593
But how the fuck do you even find anything there?
there is no fucking search funcion of any kind so you just gotta hope that in the massive spam on the zeroboard that you get a decent link to a you laugh you lose thread?
>>55443185
>and most will likely they will not trust Google enough to ever do that
Like most regular websites do? Like 4chan does (though it's possible to get around that with custom scripts which aren't going to be available for smaller websites)?
>you or someone else can always make a Google JS free site on Zeronet
Yeah, and you can always make another imageboard, but we've seen how well that always turns out.
>or even just exclude Google JS whilst still allowing other safe JS to run
Would require changes to zeronet to be made.
>And if you can't trust the site you are on,
then you should trust it without JS either
>what is reducing your attack surface
It would be impossible to gather new information without at least trusting websites you've never been before enough to view them. Saying that you should also let websites run JS which could possibly fingerprint you or run exploits for that reason is retarded. It's the difference between simply visiting a club to check it out and having unprotected sex at the club with a girl you don't know.
You obviously know nothing about computer security and zeronet stinks of sooper sekret normalfag hacker club bullshit while being just as bad as the regular web.
>>55443315
I'm not asking you to trust me, I'm asking you to be reasonable!
There's always a way to fix stuff.
If there is something wrong don't just go
"Oh it is HOPELESS wow is me!"
think of solutions like all the reasonable suggestions about CHOOSing which sites you want and which you don't, and what JS you block and what you allow.
But you are just being inflexable and unwilling to even consider something that isn't the status quo, even if the status quo is a sinking ship.
>>55443386
So what is your solution?
avoid "scary" change at all cost
and maintain the status quo till everything crumbles cause it is just hopeless?
Hide in a cave?
I like Zeronet because it is the best that I am aware of!
Nobody said it was PERFECT!
And it shouldn't have to be.
just better (even slightly) then what we have now is reason enough to use it.
>>55443403
reasonable would be to not trust any site at first, and then enable javascript if you think its safe enough and/or worth it.
you are asking for the exact opposite,
to trust everything and then block it if its unsafe.
>>55443403
>>55443484
>CHOOSing which sites you want and which you don't
...or someone could choose to consider zeronet to be shit and use one of the longer running time proven alternatives that don't have major security holes such as Tor, I2P,and Freenet. There is no reason to pick up a 4th competing standard that fills the niche of "I want Freenet with security holes."
>>55443494
Eh, I used to do things that way.
It got way to tedious and I eventually gave up.
Modern day advancements require stuff to be enable, you miss out on to much if you just shut everything that can go wrong out.
>>55443530
>advancements
sites which dont function at all with javascript they dont even need are not "advancements"
>>55439535
Underrated post here
>also dat title
>>55443524
But Zeronet isn't redundant,
it has features that Freenet will never have.
Like not being as slow as a snail.
Sure, it also lacks stuff that Freenet does have, but I never said it was a replacement.
Zeronet and Freenet are like apples and oranges, there not trying to target the exact same functionality.
>>55443596
Agreed, there is no reason why it should be an exclusive choose of one or the other.
The best would be seamless interactivity between all three.
As long as Trump wins nobody will come for your internet.
Hillary on the otherhand... will sell you out for the highest bidder.
>>55443567
But I like flashy JS effects and transitional shinyness! :(
>>55443679
>As long as Trump wins nobody will come for your internet.
Except for how he openly support internet censorship to fight the scary terrorists of course.
>>55443817
blocking mudslime countries from using the internet is not much of a loss.
>>55443910
Blocking access to websites based in parts of the world you don't like is still censorship and sets the precedent for doing it anywhere.
>>55443910
>Changing your opinion that quickly
Now I see why you support Trump
>>55444051
different anon.
>>55437079
>>55444093
Not everyone on the Internet is a hitman, anon.
>>55437079
>>55437339
>>55437350
>>55437376
Faggots like you are why the internet will fall.
This the same shit the confederacy did.
>see opposition,so you leave the union taking your senators and congressmen
>this leave the congress without opposition leaving radical republican to push their agenda
>you also now considered an enemy of the state and are persecuted,so a war happens,and you lose defeated and a puppet to north tyranny.
>now you are a weak shit living in past drinking beer and yelling the confederacy,and saying dam Yankee
YOU are taking the cowards way out and going to a safe-space where you bitch about how great the internet use to be.But when push came to shove did you fight for this great internet? NO you ran away to a safespace
>>55437247
>real technology
Personally I'm sick and tired of hearing about hip new distributed “altnet / darknet” projects that tend to have no fucking clue about crypto 101.
>>55437079
A tyranny ruled by big corporations since 99% of users only visit a handful of sites.
The smaller sites will wither and die because nobody visits them so there will be no incentive to keep it up and update it.
>>55437813
That's because i2p is still written in java :^)
>.bit domains
>Decentralized domains using Namecoin cryptocurrency.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
have they looked at namecoin recently?
>>55444706
>Anonymity
>You can easily hide your IP address using the Tor network.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>Page response time is not limited by your connection speed.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
okay, I got a good laugh out of this shit project. Next?
>>55444608
It's completely possible to fight for what you want in multiple ways at the same time. I can choose to fight for what I want on the regular web while spending most of my using other internet services that respect my privacy, instead of just fighting for what I want on the regular web and not having a backup plan ready to go if that fails (which given the current state of the web and the devices people use to connect to it, is very likely).
>>55437079
Europe wont allow it.
However the American Intranet will become isolated due to the ISP's lobbiying for control and facebook and Jewgle having their own massive intranet .
While europe's Intranet will be user Security Oriented allowing government Enforced freedom so long as the user isn't retarded (Does not apply to brexitors because they been in the USA PRISM program since forever).
>>55437079
Look at China and Russia, it's going to be shit everywhere.
>>55445206
Maybe that's why zeronet is popular in Russia and China.
>>55440867
You're so wrong it's funny. People only believe they like to have options and freedom of choice. Most people can't handle freedom at all; it's toxic to them if not diluted beyond recognition.
This makes it easier to find stuff on Zeronet.
127 . 0 . 0 . 1 : 43110 / 1idx 111z ukVx Tbir qKge kp9A 35Ji Bd Cqy
(Remove spaces)
(I seriously want to murder fuck the overzealous spam detection.)
Nobody wants to talk about the net that is Zero anymore?
:( I is sad.
It's possible the people in this thread are sleeping and assume it died (like I did) and will refind it (like I did).
>>55446203
cheers, will check later. VPN'd into some shit and I don't know how that effects things as I'm not much of a network guy.
>>55440867
>If in a restaurant there were only one soup and one main dish, it had no chance to attract customers.
I wouldn't say that so confidently. Pic related is the entirety of the California burger chain In-N-Out menu. That's it. That's all they sell. And people go apeshit when In-N-Out finally puts a store in their city. People really do value simplicity and convenience. Look at the difference between osx and linux. Which one has more options? Which one is more popular with the general public?
zero net doesn't work for me when i downloaded it for windows and opened it it showed a command line window for a split second and then closed the window.
>>55448094
Try running CMD first, then run ZeroNet.cmd from there.
This should allow you to see what is happening in the console/terminal/whatevertheycallitinwindows.
>>55448094
Also, use the bundle at https://github.com/HelloZeroNet/ZeroBundle/raw/master/dist/ZeroBundle-win.zip as I think it is the most recent.
>>55437079
Controlled by the wealthy
>>55442431
they've got their own chan which doesn't look like complete garbage.
http://127.0.0.1:43110/0chan.bit
>>55437079
That graph on the right is haf (hot af)
>>55447825
Probably, this is not that simple.
I doubt in-n-out will ever have 90% in the fast food market. Also do you know many people who always or almost always eat there.
We are different. I know plenty of people who would newer trade the freedom of choice and configuralibity the literary hundreds of Linux distros give for the dull simplicity of osx or the annoying updating terror of windows.
>>55451672
Haf = hot af = hot as fuck?
>>55437079
>implying there will be internet in the future.
>>55442431
Almost all content is legal even if you consider torrents 'illegal'. (An you chose which sites you visit/seed. So you can easily avoid even the torrenting illegality leve.l)
ZeroNet is quite new. So don't expect too much at the time being, but if you stay there for a long time, like I do, you can see it improving.
>>55452736
>implying there won't be
Packet radio is a thing and hams are running BBSes that you can connect to with a radio hooked up to a computer. Considering most realistic large scale SHTF scenarios will result in people organizing at a local level and still keeping society running to some extent a partly functioning internet (though not necessarily modern) is completely reasonable, unless a full The Road scenario happens of course in which case you'd be best off just killing yourself. In general, most deceptions of "post apocolyptic" life are ridiculous fantasy and wouldn't pan out that way in the real world.
>>55442431
You can experience the birth of the new era of the internet.
Plenty of things are in testing (or prof of concept) stage, but even now you can feel it has a promising future.
>>55452925
>you can feel it has a promising future
No, it doesn't. As pointed out earlier in this thread it's basically just Freenet with security holes due to requiring javascript and a universal ID that make it about as private as Facebook.
>>55452963
It doesn't require any sort of universal ID,
and calling it as insecure as Facebook is nothing but baseless FUD!
>>55453016
>all these posts shilling 0chan and ignoring zeronet's vulnerabilities with exclamation points
I wonder who could be behind this?
>>55437365
>increasing rise to power of fascism, in many forms, we see in the West once again in particular: it really feels like a return to the bad old days of the 80s.
The 80's weren't that bad. The internet and the 90's rise of fascism via PC/liberalism in general. Highest crime rates all that were 90's peaks. Much of what we suffer from now is legislated then as well (TA NAFTA etc in USA). EU Post WP breakup.
>>55453061
Must be a corporate shill, cause there is ooh sooo much money to be made on this FREE and open source project!
And I use exclamation points because I'm PASSIONATE!
JS is not a vulnerability anymore then any other language.
If you are using windows, you already have back doors built-in.
And fingerprinting can be done without JS too, just not as advanced.
"I wonder who could be behind this?"
sounds suspiciously like ad hominem.
>>55438030
>I prefer bureaucratic democracy than memocracy.
I think the future is city state/hyper federalist. States acquire more authority than the federal government as it should be and are perhaps broken into more pieces to better reflect it's population and geography.
>>55453186
>Must be a corporate shill
No, a government shill pushing something to compete with Tor/I2P/Freenet but with none of the privacy and more vulnerabilities.
>JS is not a vulnerability anymore then any other language.
All of the vulnerabilities used to compromise Tor users depend on javascript making it a major liability if you try to use zeronet over Tor since it requires javascript to be allowed.
>If you are using windows
>implying
>And fingerprinting can be done without JS too, just not as advanced.
Yeah, but javascript fingerprinting can easily combine enough factors to get a unique fingerprint a good portion of the time while methods of fingerprint without javascript enabled are rather limited.
![thumb_600[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/MDbEMr5.jpg "thumb_600[1].jpg")
>>55447825
>he doesn't know about the secret menu
>>55447825
>Pic related is the entirety of the California burger chain In-N-Out menu
No it literally isn't, you uncultured shut in
>>55453276
If you think I'm a gobermint shill, then you greatly over exaggerate your significants.
Like they'd care (or even know of) YOU, specifically. That's some ego you've got there.(same for 4chins and anyone in this thread)
I've already said multiple times that Zeronet is not a competitor to Freenet,
that they are like apples and oranges.
I'm beginning to suspect that you're a troll.
Zeronet is less secure, yet it is still much more secure the FACEBOOK of ALL places!
But the actual POINT of it is to provide resilience against being shutdown and censored.
And unlike Freenet it is actually fast and usable.
"I trust for profit corps with centralized servers and proprietary software to not screw people over for profit when they can (and they can) get away with it!"
Any advancement in tech can be used by big brother to watch you.
Yet your solution of "avoid anything new"
sounds like hell to me.
>>55453694
is this pasta?
it reads like pasta.
>>55453800
Liar, for it to be copy pasta it would have to either have little correlation with what it is a response to, or only correlate with a single point.
You are calling it that as a way to "attack" with no actual effort.
>>55453800
No, they have to be a troll. Either that or someone not from 4chan with crippling autism.
>>55453910
"4chan is a collective hive-mind, if they disagree with me they must be from somewhere else!"
I've been on 4chan for a (painfully) long time.
And I every reason to believe that I'm the one being trolled here.
People ITT are why the world is screwed.
>what I the future of the internet?
Ipv6
It's got all that mesh net crap too, it's more than just a extension of the amount of ip addresses
>>55453016
I can confim this. No universal ID is required. Even I have 3 distinct accounts and I'm not a paranoid type. I'm using it without Tor most of the time.
>>55453988
You are being trolled, clearly, and it's working.
>I've been on 4chan for a (painfully) long time.
Obviously not fucking long enough, Just ignore the retards ffs.
