upvote
It's not black and white though. There's a scale from "easy to censor without collateral damage" to "need to take the whole nation offline to suppress information flow".

And there is a scale from "trivial to circumvent, if only (you know) you want to" to something like "need to be very tech-savy and use custom hardware"

reply
As Spain, Italy and now France are showing us though, states have no hesitancy to take the whole country offline to block just one piece of unwanted information.
reply
The disappointing aspect is how frequently censorious actions are initiated at the beck of private corporations or authoritarian motivations
reply
OTOH, third world or dictatorships won’t blink when it comes to turning off an entire country - example is Tanzania in the recent election.. are there solutions for communication when international links are cut? A lan like solution scaled to cities or an entire country that is disconnected from the rest of the world?
reply
To be fair, those are usually cases where the reason they turned off the internet is entirely unrelated to anyone doing something questionable, and more about personal political whims as security theater. As long as you keep the bribes flowing to the dictatorship, you aren't at risk of being shut down for what you're doing.
reply
Wow that's fucking dark.

Does the tech industry still even see technology as a source for good in the world, or do we now see ourselves as the dictators' keys to power.

What future do we have if we have become totally cynical and Amoral?

reply
You can receive data over radio waves, which would be pretty hard to block country-wide I think. Sending data would be a bit trickier without being caught.
reply
this does require quite some expertise. as u noted sending can be triangulated. Also because this sending issue, it wouldnt really be an internet since only few parties would have the resources for mobile or ship-based transmitting systems that are harder to pin down or stop
reply
> are there solutions for communication when international links are cut?

How far can you scale wireless mesh nets?

reply
In theory, there is no reason it can't scale indefinitely using something similar to IP. It's already a self-building network. The hard part is how you incentivise transit nodes. Currently that's what ISPs and backbones provide. They are incentivised to interconnect because that's their core business model. So a truly decentralized Internet requires a decentralized incentive system.

This would enable circumvention, but it's also pretty easy to triangulate radio signals, so it's fairly easy for a belligerent organization to track that someone is sending something.

reply
> In theory, there is no reason it can't scale indefinitely using something similar to IP.

I'm sorry, that just wrong. Gupta-Kumar capacity scaling law (2000) says that as you add participants, each participant gets less bandwidth, until it becomes impractical. Imagine a room with 10 people talking in it. Easy. Now imagine 10,000. Hard to have a conversation if it's still all ad-hoc.

reply
You have to increase the width of the mesh.
reply
Someone ends up having to act as a hub. The more you gear for that job, the easier you are to target, and the more worth it it is to target you.

Whatever you are trying to accomplish, you have to remember that all tech is predisposed on a functioning society with cooperative people to move your packets from A to B.

Tech cannot solve the problem of Trust. Quite the opposite. It amplifies to immense degrees. In short, if you're looking for tech to save you because your Government is doing something shady, you're at the wrong level. Tackle the government.

Sad, but inevitable.

reply
> are there solutions for communication when international links are cut

There are, but currently the most promising one is under control of a very rich and very politically opinionated person who is not afraid to use that power in any way he pleases.

A truly distributed version (with multiple tech stacks, ownership and control) would be the real solution but I don't see any way this could ever manifest.

reply
This is essentially the case for Starlink
reply
On the one hand, yes. That's why possession of a starlink terminal can get you killed in Iran.

On the other hand, Ukrainians are finding out that someone else is in control of that starlink infra.

reply
i don't think anyone with enough money for shootin clusters of sattelites into orbit will be a free open internet builder. ofc thats an assumption. This network of sattelites would also need to join in and coordinate with other stuff up there, as far as i can tell its pretty crowded and theres collision risks etc.
reply
deleted
reply
Except Starlink won't hesitate to censor you as well as the Ukrainians are discovering.
reply
It’s only censorship when a democratic government does it. When an unelected businessman with no oversight and more power than most counties does it isles just property rights.
reply
A lot of people say this unironically about Facebook/Youtube/other social media. As long as it's in private hands, they're apparently free to manipulate information and restrict selected users however they want, regardless of how enmeshed they are in everybody's life.
reply
In particular, a lot of people say this about major social media platforms when they are censoring content the speaker things is genuinely bad; and then call for government regulation of those platforms in order to prevent them from censoring content the speaker likes and thinks is important. And even if the government did just nationalize Facebook, the fact that it's no longer a private company doesn't remove the political component of the decision - people argue and vote on what they want the government to do, and then sometimes a court rules that it's unconstitutional for the democratically-elected government to do the thing it wants to do.
reply
I've been reading about the early history of the Internet.

The first ARPANET link to the United Kingdom required an exception to UK law. The traditional interpretation was that the state telecom monopoly (the General Post Office) had a monopoly on data transport. It was assumed that national governments have an absolute sovereign right to inspect data packets at the border, just like they do mail and parcels. That includes searches and seizures of foreign propaganda, material illegal under domestic law, etc.

> In early 1971 Larry proposed to break the circuit and connect in the NPL network to the ARPAnet. Unfortunately for that plan (but not for me), at this time the British government was trying to get the United Kingdom into the European Economic Community (EEC). The EEC governments, particularly France, were in any case suspicious of U.K. links with the United States. It was therefore politically impossible for NPL to be linked directly to a U.S. defense project. [1]

But the Internet was an experimental network. An exception could be made. Everyone would pretend that they were inside the United States legally speaking. This sort of worked when everyone was an academic restricted by network access policies of their institutions.

> I set up a Governing Committee, with the funding partners on it: Ann Letts represented the BPO, Donald Davies represented the NPL, and I was the Chair. Because of the questionable legality of what we were doing, all proposed users had to be approved individually. I put in security procedures so that all users had to log-in, with a password, on our relay.

[2]

This is related to the protocol wars of the 1980s. The X.25 protocol that was supported by all the established telecoms providers, included mechanisms for packet authority, automatic packet billing, and political boundary packet inspection mechanisms. [3]

X.25 was decried as too centralized, too complex, and too centred around the interests of the established telecoms. (Which it was.) TCP was better for both technical and political reasons. But the Protocol Wars were not a permanent victory. It was a wonderful moment in world history but the underlying tensions have resurfaced.

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224386328_The_early...

[2] http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/research/darpa/internet-history.htm...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Internet-OSI_Standard_War...

reply
You can run tcp over ax.25 with a 20$ walkie talkie and a software modem btw. Loading the google search page takes about 30 minutes
reply
The google login page is 3MiB of bloat to show a textbox and a button. I don't think that's a good indicator.
reply
When on very bad connection, the only internet that works reasonably well is hacker news
reply
As Spain, Italy and now France are showing us though, states have no hesitancy to take the whole country offline to block just one piece of unwanted information.

The whole country of France went offline? When did that happen?

reply
Soon. Because of the protests again the government, the government ordered the ISPs to set up a nationwide block that the government can enable at the flick of a switch. See here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50229861
reply
It didn't. They are probably referring either to Quad9 being ordered to block resolving certain hosts (and therefore deciding to not offer service in france) or the french prime minister sending a notice to ISPs to prepare DNS blocks for twitter, facebook, etc.

In both cases this is not taking the whole country offline, and for both of them you can easily bypass the "block" by using any other DNS provider. You don't even need VPN/TOR or anything else complicated.

reply
i missed this, can you point me in the right direction?

i want to read more

reply
At this point, I worry about censorship of American Tech CEOs a lot more. Because it is both very real and deliberately destructive.
reply
we could all start using huawei :').

i think tech ceos might also have benefit from uncensored internet because they can build more accurate profiles of the masses to target their products etc.

reply
What are you talking about? When have Spain, Italy and France cut their Internet?
reply

  Spain: https://www.euronews.com/2026/09/18/in-spain-football-matches-knock-thousands-of-websites-and-services-offline

  France: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_France
        : https://codekhabar.com/post/france-orders-isps-to-ready-dns-blocks-for-major-social-platforms-on-oct-24
I haven't been keeping up with Italy, so you can look that one up yourself.
reply
[flagged]
reply
I know the difference between blocking individual sites and every site hosted at Vercel or behind Cloudflare
reply
the point is that people can still use the internet. u dont need cloudflare to use the internet they can be down forever and people will still have internet. they shut down access to services _on_ the internet.

it might feel like the internet is off depending on which services, but you can still find eachother and use internet if these services are down aslong as ISP networks and core routes/switches still work. if you have an IP,.and your friend has an IP and the network in between routes those,.that is the internet. If you host a website on that IP, that is a service _on_ the internet..

its distinct and an important distinction.

reply
Every time there’s a football game? At least that I’m hearing in the case of Spain. No, they don’t throw a switch, but they turn off enough CDNs to effectively turn off the internet.

Again, no personal experience, but have heard enough from folks here to believe it.

reply
Some folks on internet are not representative of a nationwide issue...
reply
They cut the whole country's internet when people are playing football, to make sure nobody is live pirating the football

This is your country. This is your country on intellectual property rights.

reply
Except they're not taking the whole country offline. AFAIK even simple VPNs work without issue. Iran took the whole country offline, because their country barely functions, and still some people managed an external connection.
reply
> Iran took the whole country offline, because their country barely functions

Iran took their whole country offline because they locked the country behind CGNAT - which is an ideal tech for offlining an entire nation.

reply
They managed the external connection because they were being provided with one by outside nations trying to topple the government. They were promptly arrested and the "protests" fizzled out. Trump then bombed them anyway.
reply
[dead]
reply
I absolutely agree, and it isn't even a scale, it's multi-dimensional. There are many different little problems that the internet solves, and they could also be solved with many different little alternatives.
reply
this is an interesting take. you are right a lot of stuff currently solved by internet can be done differently to the same effect. didnt think of that at all but ofc once you have a tool ull start applying it to lots of problems even if its not strictly needed.
reply
cant you just disable resedential and non critical connections? ISPs etc. know whos who right? no need to take the nation offline. only the people in it (civilians, medium/small businesses etc)

u could likely also readonable tell if someone would be enabling others via their access without even inspecting the actual traffic

reply
Russia is trying that (white lists) and it's proving costly enough that even they have to back off. They'll probably get there eventually but it requires serious investment of money and time and inevitably hampers the economy.
reply
interesting thanks. i guess its a drastic measure, which costs a lot, so there would be some potential tippingpoint in which the risks to the censors or the costs they are racking up by not doing it outweighs the costs of cutting it all off. Also ofcourse, 'they' need their populations somewhat with them. if an entire nation stands up you have a revolution, so maybe its a balancing act to prevent that. cut it here n there but keep the main perception its all temporary or localized etc
reply
I sometimes think mid to end of 90s was peak freedom. Never before had there been so much mostly uncensored world wide communication. Unfortunately most likely there never ever will be again.
reply
I would argue that.. despite much greater attempts at control, the internet is much more wild now. Not because it is not being surveilled, monitored, botted, manipulated or any combination of those, but because the pace of change is getting a little hard to keep up with.. not just by orgs and govs ( they normally struggle with those ), but by even by above average humans. I miss the 90s, but the feels are the same now man ( minus the hope;p ).
reply
Man, 90s hope was really peak!
reply
I watched Hackers for the first time in decades recently. Maaaannnn what amazing times they were. Like cowboys exploring the west or something
reply
Fuck man, even if you watch early apprentice tv show, it is just different. I initially just thought it was just nostalgia ( I briefly got into old arcade games and VF2 didn't age that well ), but man.. even the stupid reality shows were better.
reply
[dead]
reply
> informaiton transported over infrastructure

Even building your own internet, say over wireless is easily detected and jammed.

About the only thing that could save us (though likely cause so many new problems we won't feel saved) is some kind of more sci-fi technology involving the non-locality of the universe for devices to communicate (not even talking about FTL communication, just different topologies within universal limits).

reply
> sci-fi technology

You know, based on some people in China has learned building VPN/proxies, the best and cheap way to communicate under surveillance/censorship is to hide it in plain sight. In fact, that's how most these proxy software works.

So no, you don't need sci-fi technology. If you really want to communicate, context-coherent code words though bugged phone line should be enough, at least enough to arrange a meet up.

Also a interesting thought: maybe one day when human invented a device that could listen to quantum communications, we turn it on and ended up detecting a sea of encrypted conversations from another space-time perhaps even an universe just aligned with ours, and the device also experiences unexplained packet loss. That's what I call a plot of a sci-fi story :)

reply
It really depends on what ypu are dealing with - if you are worried about communication being too centralized and monopolized, it might be a good idea to start building and alternative. Doing that might avoid the situation getting worse, slow it down or even reverse the trend.

If you are at a stage of "we shoot people on suspicion of them being against The Cause" then indeed, this will not help.

Still, if you are not at that stage, doing something is better than nothing.

reply
Building an Alternative internet seems like a fools errand to me, like building an alternative road network. How are you going to reach a critical mass of users? What should stop the powers that control the old internet from taking off your network as soon as you beat the odds and gain popularity?
reply
That's the thing though, no? Depending on the use-case, do you >really< need a global network?

Don't get me wrong, an uncensorable and free internet for everyone is something I am very much for, but when we start to talk about nations limiting access while information has to flow, the question is not about mass-adoption anymore, but rather seeing the right tools reaching the right people.

A good example of this, imho, is the situation in Iran, when they cut off the internet. Some people were able to help themselves thanks to VPN-like apps and outside help, but that is not the majority of people.

reply
this is the thing. an alternative internet is often suggested but whos gonna host a global switching network and put cables in the seasnfor that, and will it be allowed? what about cables in the ground or antenae everywhere to spread the network? it could simply be made illegal if it isnt already
reply
I mean it would be amazing if one day access to the internet could be truly free (from costs for users, and censorship).

But as the world is now, it's not feasible in any sense yet.

The current internet is the best we have and it >can< work, we have to find solutions inside the current possibilities until tech is advanced, cheap and accessible enough for everyone interested to easily host their own infra.

But this is not easy, because what is the real goal... really?

It feels like most of the internet is about making money or involving money, even from the end users. Is there even something to fix when most people don't care enough to ditch knowingly harmful products like Facebook, TikTok, etc?

reply
It's possible that any such technology would be too complicated to ensure a clean supply chain or have weaknesses that would allow it to be tracked or jammed. Real devices have some kind of engineering tradeoff.

But I generally think that trying to solve social problems with technology is a futile endeavor. Someone will always have violence on their side. And violence is the ultimate weakness.

reply
i like this idea. it does sound scifi, maybe quantum entanglement? i know nothing about this stuff tho :)
reply
this got downvoted, ofc because i know nothing.

but in the scifi mindset, what if you have an entangled ram bank with someone else. i write to mine and they can read it from theirs. that could create a sort of entangled ram bank mesh network network? (i know, maybe super stupid thought.)

reply
It's not super stupid, but you'd have to find a quantum effect that actually does this while transferring information. If it transfers information it can't do so over the speed of light. As long as it follows that rule it may be possible, but if we had found anything like that yet we'd almost certainly be using it.
reply

   this got downvoted, ofc because i know nothing.
It’s the StackOverflow effect. If you aren’t an expert you’re punished for having the audacity to ask questions.
reply
But it wasn't even a good question. Someone says "we need to make a website" and someone chimes in "could we do that with blockchain?" and you facepalm because that's just a buzzword they heard somewhere and the question has no meaning.
reply
its not that bad, but i do wish ppl would add a comment on the downvote to show why. glad someone else dropped the link :D it might be easy to assume someone else can find such info but in reality people are so into different things that something obvious for one person can be a complete mystery to another. no clue what to search or read to even get there apart from starting physics and electronics courses from scratch and stumbling and bumlbing along to maybe someday find out why that downvote happend.

Glad some people do like to be smart rather than smug, and provide the link :)

reply
It gets downvoted because it's a common trope that is explicitly impossible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem

reply
Hence one of the key points I stated that whatever effect cannot work FTL.
reply
thank you, i wasnt aware this is interesting ^^
reply
Or, hear me out, optical laser mesh
reply
Very easy to detect and deal with, especially when you're talking about fixed positions like your home.
reply
But impossible to detect if you aren't standing in the beam path. Or use fiber, and it's impossible to detect if you don't trip over the fiber.
reply
Man, I don't think you've ever actually built free optical laser networks, they are kind of a pain in the ass and everyone is going to notice you've got one stuck up on a pole.

The next time its foggy or raining a tuned photon sensor to the spectrum that these devices run at will light up like a Christmas tree. If you're really intent on catching said people, you'd have drones flying around sprinkling light chaff and detecting where it detects optical scattering.

reply
It seems relatively simple to me to detect fibers hanging around cities as soon as the network is bigger than two nerdy neighbors. Same for lasers and telescopes.
reply
ud need tons of beams tho do maybe its easy enough to segment the network badly by finding bunches of them?
reply
People seem to be oblivious to the fact that the internet infrastructure has been government controlled since its inception. No cable laid under the sea between two nations can exist without the government approval and without the governments tapping into the link. IP addresses, MAC addresses, domain names, all managed by "super partes" international organizations swore to neutrality and fairness.

Unless you make your own physical network, it's trust all the way down

reply
Trust... and encryption. That second one's quite important.
reply
What about a solar powered mesh network build on commonly available LoRa chips and micro controllers ?
reply
Does this exist already? Meshtastic doesn't do IP.
reply
Sure does - MeshCore for example:

https://meshcore-analyzer.eu/#map

Quite active here in Czech Republic for example.

As for the IP protocol - maybe its too much overhead for this use case ?

MeshCore uses PKI and public key prefixes as addresses & for routing/repeating.

reply
Did not know this, thanks for sharing.
reply
Or Reticulum. Nomadnet over lora works pretty well.
reply
Yeah, MeshCore works impressively well but definitely there is a huge space for many nice improvements and novel use cases. Only time will tell if they will come MeshCore, the other LoRa mesh projects or something completely new. :)
reply
Who owns the spectrum?
reply
In Europe it is using the 868 MHz ISM band with some duty cycle rules (maximu of 10% of every hour can be used for broadcasting).

In the US apparently 433 MHz is used instead.

reply
These bands are trivial to jam should any adversary want.
reply
Sure, but there are some issues with that:

- LoRa has actually quite a long range if done right (tens of km, upt to hundred+) so you would have to jam all that.

- This kind of jamming would be actually illegal, so you would have to make it legal first/tollerate it & expend non-trivial respurces to jam tiny repeaters from Aliexpress on random trees.

- The 868 MHz hand is actually used by a lot of IoT stuff like sensor networks, water/gas/electricity meter monitoring, some alarm systems - so if you did effectively jam the band, those things would break as well.

- Also if things went as far as active jamming being used, things might be heated up enough that whoever is running the mesh won't be playing by the reules as well - like, using a different, notmally ilegal fregvency or even triangulate and attack the jammers.

reply
We've had enough people around here _accidentally_ jam the 868 MHz and each time it took months to figure out what was going on before meshtastic worked again..
reply
Yeh; internet is just passing network traffic between each other

I am part of a Wireguard private VPN network with friends and family

But I mean we are almost all hardware/software engineers or office power user types familiar with VPN use

Just start generating shared keys amongst each other and go 'round swapping IP over signal and such

Like turn making key-share friends into real life Pokemon Go

The bulk of the people with skin in these companies are 55+ and excluding everyone younger

But the younger crowd outnumbers them

We could "meet the moment" and just stop using their services

It's not like a black hole will swallow humanity if we stop listening to an aging minority

reply
Wireguard traffic is easy to detect and block apparently
reply
Why is the prevalence of typos increasing in the past year or so? I don't mean to single you out; your comment was just a convenient example.

Do people (and AI bots) think this makes them seem more human? Or is it yet another symptom of civilization in decline?

reply
Maybe you've been brought up in a culture (Sweden) which has no values except putting extreme importance on uniform spelling? People from other countries probably don't give it the same importance.
reply
Before 2021 I hated typos etc but now I like seeing imperfect text in this new age. I wouldn't have considered it could be a bot (and I don't think it is) but it would certainly have worked on me (to what end, who knows..)
reply
I tend to think the latest models know that "how do I make XYZ more human?" would include making typos. Seems pretty basic.
reply
deleted
reply
Reticulum. Encryption-required mesh-routing alternative to the IP stack. Can route over just about any medium (piggyback IP, Lora, WiFi, Bluetooth, USB, microwave P2P, anything). Also future-proofed with support for high-bandwidth persistent connections.
reply
they can't block the ionosphere

but what if they could... they dump chaff in the air

reply
If you don't know, China runs censorship program against radio signals beginning from the cold war time and it's not officially stopped yet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_jamming_in_China. Of course it's not blocking ionosphere level, but not that different than chaffing the air (at the receiver side).
reply
There was, once, but that has decayed rapidly alongside the centralization of the Internet. There are very few websites people even use nowadays, and many of them block legal expressions due to ideological and economic pressures. Payment processors and banks regularly restrict businesses and individuals from legal commercial activities, examples are Pornhub/MindGeek, Steam, and firearm dealers.

There is also now a precedent for T1 ISPs to block whatever legal websites they wish, and there is little recourse to be had there either. Not to mention arbitrary legal pressure for ISPs is also precedent now due to Judge Katherine Polk Failla.

On top of that, several EU countries have been using DNS blocks to prevent piracy and access to “bad” websites for ages, which has further been eroding the Big-I Internet into various separate internets.

https://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2026/nr-occ...

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/isps-should-not-police...

https://torrentfreak.com/dns-resolver-quad9-will-leave-franc...

reply
In the late aughts and early 2010s I and a few other people came up with the `darknet plan` aka `project meshnet` which was a subreddit and adjacent communities dedicated to creating a completely parallel internet using 802.11s mesh networks akin to the Athens and NYC meshes that span a huge portion of those metros.

The movement eventually got coopted by the CJDNS project and its fans. Instead of a completely separate internet they were advocating more of an overlay on top of the existing internet (because that didn't require solving interurban/intercontinental backhaul), which to my mind addresses essentially none of the problems we set out to solve, so I eventually lost interest.

But today we have things like LoRa and a greater hacker community around the ISM bands, which might be just what's needed. I have hope one day we can achieve global interconnectivity without rent-seeking ISPs.

reply
I think this this the perfect time to bring back old 90-00s webhosting, web rings and all and get them to be trendy and viral if some celebrity could pull people in and get them off this dirtyweb, bot-ridden and dead-internet-theoried. People have been veered hard into content creation and running their own little merchandise dropship etc businesses and all of the options are dinosaurs now.

Wordpress is getting its popularity nuked from orbit, there is definitely room for another "internet" that isn't walled garden social media app slop. Might even get kids into computers again.

But in this admin, economy and no startup capital and a million other things going on right now I don't think it will ever happen.

reply
Do you consider removing illegal content censorship?
reply
You might be confusing two different things.

Censorship itself doesn't mean right or wrong, good or bad. It's very likely that you would censor your young kids from watching violent videos of real murders and would consider that a good thing, as an example.

Removing 'illegal' content is censorship in your example. If this is a good or bad thing depends on a great many considerations.

reply
Of course it's censorship. In china you can't talk about a certain quadrangle, and when they remove content about it, that's censorship.
reply
deleted
reply