.bit will be the new .com / A Decentralized Alt-Net

[TheReal1980]

After what has happened on the net this week with right/far right websites taken down, DDoS protection companies refuse to help, hacked websites, banned from ICANN, removed Facebook and Twitter accounts, removal of apps et.c you begin to wonder what people will do in order to say what they want to say or read what they want to read.

 

This is where the idea of a decentralized internet comes in. I believe that in the near future the .bit domain will skyrocket in use. People will get the hang of how to go to .bit websites, how to create .bit websites and how to use the technology overall. Free speech it too important to people however ugly it may be at times.

 

For those that think that this only applies to the Right:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/14/donald-trump-inauguration-protest-website-search-warrant-dreamhost

 

Quote

 

The US government is seeking to unmask every person who visited an anti-Trump website in what privacy advocates say is an unconstitutional “fishing expedition” for political dissidents. 

The warrant appears to be an escalation of the Department of Justice’s (DoJ) campaign against anti-Trump activities, including the harsh prosecution of inauguration day protesters.

 

 

Personally I have been using Zeronet.io for a while, getting to know the tech and how it's used and it's really interesting.

 

What do you guys think, will people continue to use Facebook/Twitter or will we slowly move to a more decentralized type of internet?

 

*****

OT: I see LinusTechTips.bit is available...

[MyName13]

Truly decentralised internet can't exist, at least now, first there are ISP, then there are search engines and servers.

 

By the way how was decentralised internet in Sillicon valley supposed to work?If every user has a part of the internet on their devices what would happen if some user disconnected from the network or deleted the data on his phone/device?

[porina]

There have been many attempts at unofficial/alternative name services in the past, and all have failed. Is there a sufficient force to allow this one to succeed? I'm not sure name resolving alone is enough if there are few places willing to host the content at all, and may drive things into dark web.

[RumSwift]

As for the far right websites etc, they're already pitching tent on the Deep Web. 

[JanFrode]

Even tho the idea behind the .bit being a Decentralized Alt-Net might be a good idea, it would still have to rely on the current infrastruct to operate, so all the other companies/parties will still be able to exclude or hammer down the sites being made.
 

[SCHISCHKA]

There must be over a hundred decentralised networks available in 2017. I was using a decentralised network the other day. There wasn't much on it and i cant remember its name. There would have to be a video, news service, and mobile app to drive success.

[SCHISCHKA]

25 minutes ago, Rhyss said:

pitching tent on the Deep Web

i should resist reading this in a dirty way.

too late.

[Taf the Ghost]

ICANN is really the biggest issue, but we'll see new tech approaching even that problem.  IPv6 might start seeing adoption as a lot of people start to find work arounds. (ICANN control was moved from the US Government to the UN. Which means it went from "problem" to "eventual dumpster fire".)

 

The biggest mistake that Silicon Valley made was doing this for a high-profile event so they could Virtue Signal about it. While it might be the "Great Nazi Purge", in reality this was an event some of us knew was eventually going to happen: SV grouping up to unperson groups from the Internet. Doesn't matter if it's Neo-Nazis, as the Valley is so ideologically corporate-Left-wing that they'll target groups all over the place that they decide to do it. They've collected a lot of power to themselves, which means there's going to be a counter response.

 

And, if they can do this seemingly on their own, they can also be forced to by Governments. Freedom Advocates in some far-flung locale? If Google wants to operate in the country, better wipe out those accounts. They didn't head down a Slippery Slope; they just willingly jumped off a cliff. Big Tech is now a *problem*. This means Solutions are now a profitable endeavor. 

 

People thought the Internet had normalized? Oh, no. It's just getting started. Break the chains, it's a revolution.

[colonel_mortis]

Moved to General Discussion because it is just a discussion of whether current (non-technical) events could influence the use of a technology.

Please remember that this topic is about the technology, and not politics. As per the Community Standards, if this topic becomes sidetracked discussing politics rather than the .bit name system, it will be locked. "Lots of people are annoyed right now, and some potentially privacy-invading warrants have been issued, so people are losing faith in the internet and might switch to the new system" is fine, "democrats are all members of the KKK" is not.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 hour ago, TheReal1980 said:

you begin to wonder what people will do in order to say what they want to say or read what they want to read.

Probably, not much. The vast majority will always do what is easier, and by easier I mean zero effort if possible. The TL;DR army doesn't need to migrate anywhere to watch viral videos. 

 

1 hour ago, TheReal1980 said:

 

For those that think that this only applies to the Right:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/14/donald-trump-inauguration-protest-website-search-warrant-dreamhost

An alternative network won't help with that, just like the "dark web" isn't beyond the reach of the DoJ. 

In fact, I wonder to what extent an alternative whatever other than alternative service providers are needed at all for that end. I mean, people act like it is impossible for them to find /create alternative services to Google, etc, and the solution is to create a while Internet? I don't really see a clear connection between the two things really. 

 

10 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

(...) 

Are you trying to get the thread locked? 

[TheReal1980]

3 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

An alternative network won't help with that, just like the "dark web" isn't beyond the reach of the DoJ. 

In fact, I wonder to what extent an alternative whatever other than alternative service providers are needed at all for that end. I mean, people act like it is impossible for them to find /create alternative services to Google, etc, and the solution is to create a while Internet? I don't really see a clear connection between the two things really.  

Yeah I read something about the dark web some time ago, do you have any source to when the DoJ shut down a .bit domain, I never heard about this to be honest?

I don't think the problem is creating alternatives, the problem is that if you say something the "big boys" don't agree with then they can "ICANN" you, then you have no platform.

Also, I am not sure if you can buy a domain, run a website et.c totally anonymously? If so I was not aware of it.

[RumSwift]

39 minutes ago, SCHISCHKA said:

i should resist reading this in a dirty way.

too late.

loooooong shot, but Death Grips?

[SansVarnic]

Two words. Pipe Dream.

 

 

 

 

Not to sound to negative or anything .... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[SpaceGhostC2C]

15 minutes ago, TheReal1980 said:

Yeah I read something about the dark web some time ago, do you have any source to when the DoJ shut down a .bit domain, I never heard about this to be honest?

The link wasn't about shutting down, but about getting a list of visitors. 

Regarding the deal web, the FBI took over Silk Road (as in they copied the entire server), arrested its founder, and used the ghost site to hunt for others. 

With respect to .bit, I first learned about it in this thread, so obviously no clue about whether something happened yet. 

 

15 minutes ago, TheReal1980 said:

 

Also, I am not sure if you can buy a domain, run a website et.c totally anonymously? If so I was not aware of it.

That's a different question (probably the answer is no). I don't think the sites being denied service were concerned with anonymity, but deemed illegal, so their main problem was just getting the services they need from private companies. 

[Sniperfox47]

*facepalm* can we all just standardize on a single base cryptocurrency? Personally I'd vote for Eth because of all the nice APIs it exposes (SWARM, Whisper, Contracts, Web3, etc.), it's eventual move to PoS, and the fact that it was specifically built for running software on top of it, but ffs I'd settle for bitcoin atm...

 

We have .bit running on Namecoin, zeronet and ipfs running on bitcoin, web3 clearnet sites running on etherium, and a whole bunch of other smaller ones... Why?

[TheReal1980]

44 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

The link wasn't about shutting down, but about getting a list of visitors. 

Regarding the deal web, the FBI took over Silk Road (as in they copied the entire server), arrested its founder, and used the ghost site to hunt for others. 

With respect to .bit, I first learned about it in this thread, so obviously no clue about whether something happened yet. 

 

That's a different question (probably the answer is no). I don't think the sites being denied service were concerned with anonymity, but deemed illegal, so their main problem was just getting the services they need from private companies. 

Yeah, I remember it now (about silk road). With .bit domains you can buy and host them completely anonymous. Sorry if I write like I sell .bit addresses but I really believe there is a future for this, a big one. Or maybe, like someone posted above me, it's all a pipe dream. Those who live will see I guess.

 

Here is a small infomercial about .bit

18 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

*facepalm* can we all just standardize on a single base cryptocurrency? Personally I'd vote for Eth because of all the nice APIs it exposes (SWARM, Whisper, Contracts, Web3, etc.), it's eventual move to PoS, and the fact that it was specifically built for running software on top of it, but ffs I'd settle for bitcoin atm...

 

We have .bit running on Namecoin, zeronet and ipfs running on bitcoin, web3 clearnet sites running on etherium, and a whole bunch of other smaller ones... Why?

The beautiful thing about this is that it is not up for a vote, people can use what they want. If we standardize it then maybe something happens down the road and everyone will get affected by it.

I like Eth too btw ;).

[Mooshi]

Going through this much effort sounds like the deep web or Bitcoin--they're going to be dwelling among drug dealers and pedophiles (which they probably already have).

 

If someone is willing to go to that length just to say non-whites need to die, there is severe mental damage going on somewhere.

 

Same can be applied to the left as well who are just as insane. Personally, I see .bit being less used than .tech. Even the extension kinda sounds like it leads to somewhere fishy.

[Sniperfox47]

4 hours ago, Mooshi said:

Going through this much effort sounds like the deep web or Bitcoin--they're going to be dwelling among drug dealers and pedophiles (which they probably already have).

Or for books. Or research. Or for anonymous communication in oppressive nations. Or for piracy.

4 hours ago, Mooshi said:

If someone is willing to go to that length just to say non-whites need to die, there is severe mental damage going on somewhere.

If that was where it stopped I wouldn't really have an issue with it. The issue is with the major tech companies taking it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay further than just banning some neonazis and white supremacists.

 

Plus there's the fact that decentralized networks are good for everybody, since they allow people to communicate outside the censors of state. While state is important, it's also important to be able to question state.

 

4 hours ago, Mooshi said:

Same can be applied to the left as well who are just as insane. Personally, I see .bit being less used than .tech. Even the extension kinda sounds like it leads to somewhere fishy.

.bit will absolutely be less used. Primarily since it's main use right now is as a DNS for zeronet which is used a tiny fraction of the amount the primary internet is.

 

The issue with .tech or any other traditional name service is that it's controlled by ICANN (which was one of the tech groups that went off the deep end this past week). This means that it's subject to ICANN's censorship as well as any state actors acting through them.

 

That's also the biggest benefit of traditional DNS though. Centralization makes everything a bit simpler, which makes it appeal more to Dick and Jane on the street. It also means there's only one option, unlike zeronet which has like... 4 forks now I think?

 

In reality, using zeronet is no harder than using the clearnet. Pop on a website, grab the zeronet browser, and let it sync to the net then click the directory listing, vs pop on a website, grab an internet browser, and then go search for a search engine.