this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2025
205 points (95.6% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27461 readers
2033 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

How can a group of volunteers build at least the tech for a replacement for the internet?

I was hoping that each individual user could run and maintain a piece of the infrastructure in a decentralized grassroots way.

How can users build a community owned and maintained replacement for the internet?

I hope that we can have our own servers and mesh/line/tower infrastructure and like wikipedia/internet-archive type organization and user donations based funding.

How could this be realized?

Can this be done with a custom made router that has a stronger wifi that can mesh with other's of it's kind? like a city wide mesh? or what are ways to do this?

Edit: this is not meant as a second dark web but more like geocities or the old internet with usermade websites

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

There’s a reddit community called “darknetplan” that’s dedicated to this question.

I would love to see a lemmy community on the same topic.

It was formed in response to the internet lockdowns during the Arab Spring, with the goal to discuss technology for creating a decentralized internet.

Reading the best of on that community is a great place to start. /r/DarkNetPlan

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Maybe write up some instructions for volunteer operators to provide various components of an IP network. Some could provide user access points, some could provide long distance links, some can provide routing, and some can provide name resolution. No new tech is required, but it will be expensive.

All of this is already set up to work with low trust in the network itself on the Internet, so it's definitely possible. There may even be good options for leasing long distance data lines that are currently unused.

Definitely check out Helium and MeshTastic. Neither are high speed data network s but similar in spirit.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

In my experience, "making a new one" never works.

What we can do is hack the old one. Go back to old protocols that work, undermine anything proprietary. Scrape fandomwiki to breezewiki, mod your discord client, make websites on neocities and nekoweb, use RSS to follow and email to comment. All the tools are there, leadership is the hard part.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (8 children)

Why would you want to replace the internet at a technical level, which is what the post appears to be focused on?

There's plenty of arguments to burn-it-down at a social level, but building a second technical implementation doesn't get you around those. Having individuals own more of the core doesn't do much when the network level itself is largely neutral to the content that passes through it.

Also the core of the internet is built around big, fat pipes. Those are beyond the means of most hobbiest folks running their own equipment. Without those pipes, traffic will reach bottlenecks easily and usability will suffer.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I also don't see how hobbyists can install undersea cables.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Hobbyists could probably set up IP over UHF connections though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

very interesting!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

UHF is strictly line of sight, and finicky HF (which bounces off the ionosphere) might have a total global bandwidth of 15mbit/s during a good hour of a good day. For everyone. If you use the entire possible spectrum.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

It's kinda funny, the 2 meter amateur radio band (in the United States this is 144 to 148 MHz, right in the middle of VHF) is 4 MHz wide. If you add up ALL of the available bandwidth allocated to amateurs from 10 meters down, it adds up to less than 4 MHz. The 70cm band is tens of MHz wide.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

More practical for hobbyists to launch satellites. Which some have. There are amateur radio satellites in orbit.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Been a while since I've seen an O.G. Shadowrun screenshot.

(O.G as in the video games. I'm well aware they were a role playing system long before that)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A bit late to the party, but I've had my eyes on two projects that would fulfill this criteria -- at least in the software routing level rather than the physical level.

GNUnet is built by the GNU project. It attempts to decentralize the internet by building an entirely new communication stack that essentially creates a decentralized DNS. Their goal is to make connections private and secure connections between nodes, but not necessarily anonymous.

Personally I don't embrace any projects that use cryptocurrency as their backend. Such as ZeroNet, Handshake, and the like. A networking protocol shouldn't use money as foundation.

Freenet uses existing web technologies to be interoperable yet decentralized with the current web stack. It utilizes WebAssembly to create decentralized programs and uses WebSockets for interpretability with existing web technology. It also uses "Small World" routing which they have tested to be the most effective form of peer discovery and communication in a decentralized environment. Their goal is to make an efficient decentralized network. They're leaving the privacy, security, and anonymity to other developers that want to build on top of Freenet.

Both are open source. My money is on Freenet. GNUnet seems to be trying to replace too much too soon -- big if true. Freenet understands the value of efficiency and interoperability first.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Beaker Browser lets you make sites and have people connect to it via P2P https://beakerbrowser.com/ ; it uses the Hypercore protocol - In a way, it's an "easier to get into" attempt, since the browser doubles as a "server"

There's also I2P that works in a similar manner to Freenet and has much greater focus on privacy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's another project I know of called MaidSafe.

They're trying to create a decentralized and autonomous mesh Internet (Hardware and all). The biggest challenge of making that work is ensuring there are enough data links, bandwidth and storage space available for the network to operate. And to make that happen, at the end of the day all that hardware, bandwidth and resources need to be paid for. So it also has an internal cryptocurrency to keep track of who is supplying these resources. You can earn this currency by providing storage and connectivity, and you'll need to spend it to use bandwidth and storage. You can use your own idle PCs to earn this currency throughout the day, but if you don't want to do that, you can also just buy some at it's market value to use the network. (Those people using the network without hosting servers are what will give the currency any value, and how the people providing lots of resources will get paid).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not a fan of essential protocols built on the foundations of cryptocurrency. Using a cryptocurrency simply adds another layer of complexity to onboarding. Along with that, because it's inherently tied to financial value, there will generally be a decently centralized component unless handled delicately.

I'm more leaning towards a protocol free to use without any need for onboarding. If Tor, I2P, Freenet, and the like were to be built on cryptocurrency, I certainly believe a lot less people would use it.

Don't get me wrong. I think crypto is great for its purpose of being an immutable global currency. But when it comes to trying to innovate existing infrastructure, it tends to be lackluster. Most infamously are NFT stunts that corporate entities do such as NFT Fantasy Football, and more niche things such as UnstoppableDomains' NFT domain name. Even Filecoin and Siacoin aim to do the same thing, but really, cloud storage is cheaper and faster than those cryptos.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago

Along with that, because it's inherently tied to financial value, there will generally be a decently centralized component unless handled delicately.

Well, as I understand it, their goal is to make something totally decentralized. That is after all, one of the primary features of good crypto currencies.

And the thing is, they're trying to build actual physical infrastructure here, people running computers and routers, and they're all using energy at someone's expense. Given those expenses, money will have to be involved at some point if it's ever going to work, there's really not much way around it. So if you want this decentralized, with nobody controlling things, I really can't see any way of doing it without a cryptocurrency.

And yeah, NFTs are garbage, no argument there. For every good use for crypto, there are a thousand truly stupid ideas.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

Yeah, the internet itself isn't the issue here. It's kind of exactly your vision. Owned by countless different entites across the world, who all work together, interconnect and make it what it is. We already have that.

The issue are the big platforms who sit on top of it all. But we don't need to invent anything or change any technology for that. Anyone is free not to type "Facebook" into their address bar or install the app. It's not a technological problem

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you want more user owned internet, make federalized services not just more popular, but easier to spin up and run. Lemmy is great, but I should be able to spin up an instance on my home server without much trouble. Give me the ability to run and manage peer tube on my own.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

I would totally agree 100% if larger instances were somehow able to become cheaper to run/host.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Every single time I stumble upon topics like this i can only remember: ZeroNet

You hosted your own piece of the internet on your machine.

If the target is to just bypass the regular ISPs, that is an entirely different task. The closest I could think about would be creating wide LAN networks, capable of interconnecting with each other, in parallel.

But I risk you'd quickly step on some communications regulation. Laying out cables requires permits. Wireless signals occupy signal bands.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

Big mesh networks are 'easy' but I think the reality is most people don't want to be responsible for it. They want to use utilities not run them.

Another aspect is that different people will have significantly different burdens, if you live in a dense apartment building, it can be easy to wrap up the infra for the building into an HOA or other collective, but people in suburbs or less dense areas will need huge long range antennas and underground cables that have a disproportionate cost.

I think more than a community run physical internet layer, we need neutralized, municipal internet as a utility.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Wireless links can be done on certain parts of the spectrum without a license. Just need clear line of sight.

It's a knowledge issue. Network admin skills aren't easy, and good network admins make a lot for a reason. Coordinating to build even a regional network is difficult, much less crossing a continent or a planet. It's harder than you think, even if you already think it's hard.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

The closest I could think about would be creating wide LAN networks, capable of interconnecting with each other, in parallel.

Something like this was being pushed around in Wisconsin a decade ago but I forget what it was called. I only remember this guy talking about a little router-like device and said he had installed several all over the city for an alternative to the mainstream internet. But take this with a grain of salt as I don't remember details.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I had some vague interest some time back in some of this some time back, the idea of a "zero-admin" network where you could just have random people plug in more infrastructure, install some software package on nodes, and routing and all would just work. No human involvement beyond plugging physical transport in.

Some things to consider:

  • People will, given the opportunity, use network infrastructure as a DDoS vector. You need to be strong against that.

  • It's a good bet that not everyone in the system can be trusted.

  • Not only that, but bad actors can collude.

  • Because transport of data has value, if this is free, you have to worry about someone else who provides transport for existing data just routing stuff over your free system and flooding it.

  • If the system requires encryption to mitigate some of the above issues (so, for example, one sort of mechanism might be a credit-based system where one entity can prove that it has routed some amount of data from A to B in exchange for someone else routing some amount of data from C to D -- Mojo Nation, the project Bram Cohen did before BitTorrent, used such a system to "pay" for bandwidth), that's going to add overhead.

  • If you want your network to extend to routing data onto the Internet, that's going to consume Internet resources. Even if you can figure out a way to set up a neighborhood network, the people who, for example, run and maintain submarine cables are not going to want to do that gratis. And yeah, to some degree, you can just unload costs onto other users, the way that it's common for heavy BitTorrent users to pay the same monthly rate as that little old lady who just checks her email, even though said heavy users are tying up a lot more time on the line. But if you are successful, at some point, this stops flying below the radar and ISPs start noticing that User X is incurring a greatly disproportionate degree of resource usage. I should note that there are probably valid use cases that don't extend to routing data onto the Internet, but if you don't permit for that, that's a very substantial constraint.

If anyone has to do something that they don't want to do (e.g. run line from saturated point A to saturated point B), then you're potentially looking at having to pay someone to do something, and then you're just back to the existing commercial Internet system...which for most people, isn't that expensive and does a reasonable job of moving data from Point A to Point B.

From a physical standpoint, while different parts of the network can probably use different types of infrastructure, if you want sparse, cheap-to-deploy infrastructure over an area, my guess is that in many cases line-of-sight laser networks are probably your best bet, especially in cities. You can move data from point A to point B quickly through other people's airspace without paying for it, today. Laser links come with some drawbacks: weather and such will disrupt them to some degree, so you have to be willing to accept that.

The main application that I could think of for regional-only transport, avoiding routing onto the Internet, was some kind of distributed backup system. A lot of people have unused storage capacity. You can use redundant distributed data storage, the way Hyphanet does. You can make systems that permit one user to prove that they are storing a certain amount of data to let them build credibility by requesting hashes of data that they say that they're storing. It won't deal with, say, a fire burning down the whole area, but for a lot of people, basically having some kind of "I store your offsite data using my unused storage capacity in exchange for you doing the same for me, and we can both benefit enough to want to continue use of the system" system might be worthwhile. That's also likely to permit for higher-latency stuff involving encryption and dealing with redundancy. I think that "Internet service for free" off such a system is going to be a lot harder.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Mesh networking is a good way to get a functional enclave going. NYC is going hard on this right now. It's built to be a on-ramp for the internet, but also hosts its own services.

The hard part is that suburbia (where I assume most lemmings are) is more or less built to make any kind of community, let alone a radio network, really hard to pull off. Urban areas have an outsized advantage due to population density and that most folks live multiple stories above ground; everyone is already in a tower. It's not impossible in a flatter environment, just harder.

Long-distance links... well, I don't have an answer. In theory people could pool their resources and get a few satellites up to do this. I suggest satellites since it's way easier than the other models, although maybe fiber links are cheaper to lease these days? Either way, keeping that model going (maintenance, support, etc) would require cash-flow. Outside of something like Patreon, this would just reinvent the existing ISP model and should be approached with caution.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 13 hours ago

just reinvent the existing ISP model and should be approached with caution.

Not the same. A non-profit ISP has different motivations and goals than a commercial ISP.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Replacing “the internet”? Not gonna happen.

Replacing the web (which is what you seem to mean)? Also not gonna happen but it's at least imaginable.

Personally I'd prefer that we stop wasting our time on these silly utopian fantasies of “replacing” things and instead think about making them better. The World Wide Web, and everything it makes possible, is a treasure. It doesn't need replacement, it needs improvement, and the improvement is absolutely happening already.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Protocols and decentralization are a good step.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Curious, what kind of protocols do we need to change or replace?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Can we replace BGP, just because it's a flaming dumpster fire?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But I have the best route to lemmy :)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

You would still have that with another protocol.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

you could buy some ip space and setup bgp to peer with hurricaine electric or a local exchange and then be an integral part of the internet, essentially being your own ISP.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I'm just dreaming here so humour me if you like, or don't, no harm done.
Would it be possible to build an independent and mostly autonomous hardware backbone for the internet using some sort of mesh-like design?
I.e. consider a mesh of nodes that are solar powered with batteries to last the night. You plop those all over the place: your roof, in meadows, on vehicles, bus stops, wherever. They connect to each other wirelessly. They should be cheap and near maintenance free. In case one dies, the mesh should have enough redundancy to compensate while the node is being replaced.

Something like that should be fully independent, net-neutral and accessible by everyone right. Although you will need a rather high density of nodes/people who join, for it to work

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In Austria we have FunkFeuer
Which is a separate network of individuals that directly links them up through antennas

https://www.funkfeuer.at/

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Kudos for the Sega Genesis Shadowrun screenshot there.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I know I loved that game!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

you cant. cause someone will have to own the hardware, to install it, to pay the bills and maintenence. So someone will always have critical control over some part or another.

and that wont go away until we become a Star Trek utopian society.. and given the way things are in the world right now, we're going in the exact opposite of that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

you don’t need custom anything, you just need to set it up. You can put access points on your roof and on your neighbors’ roofs and on the roofs of buildings on a distant hill, plug them into routers, configure an addressing scheme and routing rules and you’re set.

anybody with a connection to any of those nodes can set up a server and offer content.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Basically the problem is that you want to connect to the world-wide-internet, but you to so you need an ISP or satellite data provider to act as a middle man so they have all the control over who gets to access the internet (by paying them a service fee). What it sounds like you want is a mesh network where each user communicates with other users directly. Instead of your computer connecting to an ISP through your router, you connect to other computers in a local area network typically through wifi or radio signals. Its a decentralized network that everyone owns a small piece of which they send and recieve data from eachother.

This technology has been around a very long time. Would you like to guess why its not popular or well known? Well, its slow and only useful in rural areas where you aren't getting ISP service anyway. An intranet composed of 20 people connected in a few mile radius sharing usenet level information at download/upload speeds in the low kilobytes per second isn't exactly what people think about or want when they think of the 'internet'.

Perhaps a time will come where a consumer bought mesh based network router comes onto the market with enough advertising and appeal to be bought into by the masses with state/nation wide coverage built around a smallnet protocol like Gemini. Something like this almost happened with the Helium Network unfortunately it was designed to send smart IOT information in small packets and was only mass adopted because it was tied to mining crypto shitcoin through proof-of-connectivity. If someone can create something similar but without the shitcoin, with a mesh router box that host your website and is sold on the idea of a decentralized internet with a one-time purchase to cut out ISP it might just work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

a consumer bought mesh based network router

What specs would this fictional device likely have?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Look Into specs for helium miners for hardware and you'll have a rough idea. The real question is software stack. How such a device would be interacted with from a user interface level, how would its version of webpages would work? I imagine its webpages would have to be text based with the option to download images or audio files as seperate files like the gemini protocol displayed as gemtext. Would consumers be willing to go back to early days web 1.0 style content like blogs and internet journals? You couldn't use such a network connection for work or banking so thats another limitation.

Look into ham radio internet and mesh networks in general its not fiction its just never seen enough mass adoption in a easy to set up onsumer bought package thats successfully advertised and well distributed.

load more comments
view more: next ›