On 2/26/21 12:21 AM, David Griffith wrote:
> Tim Daneliuk <in...@tundraware.com
>> 'Glad I hung on to my old uucp manuals :)
> I too have been thinking of using radio to link Usenet servers.
> Traditional packet, even going with 9600 bps will work. Wifi with
> highly-directional antennas set up point-to-point seem like the best
> approach. That seems to work well with standard APs as long as you get
> the antennas up high enough and aimed right.
> I'm uncertain how this can be made to work with omnidirectional antennas
> and remain unlicensed. A Usenet backbone run by hams with users
> connecting through the internet certainly is possible. I'm unclear
> though if passing traffic by non-hams would run afoul of the rules of
> amateur radio.
There are a number of unlicensed low-power radio models to use. First,
one could use meshed WiFi - much like you see in large building or - these
days - even in your own home.
There are also sub-100mw radio allocations that require no licensing.
Since USENET is entirely text, one could imagine heavy compression and
encryption being used to minimize the size and visibility of the
payloads. Another to deliver them would be over a peer-to-peer UUCP
style delivery over a cell phone network.
The salient points here are:
- Distribute the content widely so no single server is a deadly
point of failure or under the control of a single entity.
This comes at the cost of speed of delivery. You eventually get
the groups you care about, but not in real time.
- Use multiple transports, not just one, to replicate the delivery
as many ways as possible using existing infrastructure.
- Use compression, encryption, and TOR routing type models to
anonymize as much as possible.
But let's not kid ourselves. Such models also have big downsides. Witness the
use of TOR for really evil purposes like murder for hire, child abuse, and so on.
I don't quite know what the answer to this is, but letting Google, LinkedIn, Reddit,
AWS, Azure, FaceBook, etc. decide what is "acceptable" speech is not ... acceptable
to me. The tech giants depend on central control to decide who does- and does
not get platform access. Remove that centralization and no one controls
Make no mistake, they just targeted "undesirable" political
speech. But they are absolutely going to target anything their woke
insanity dictates. Do you smoke a pipe? Do you eat red meat? Are you devout in
your traditional religious practices? All of these and more are already under
attack by the elites. They hide behind claims of virtue, but what they
really want is control.
Bad ideas thrive in the dark. They die in sunlight.