Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Mojeek (mojeek@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 08-Jun-2023 23:20:57 JST Mojeek

   people have been talking in some spaces about the web kind of disappearing - have you tried to go past page 10 on Bing or a meta using it recently?!?!

   whatever explains this, we've got a guide on how you can go VERY DEEP into the results pages on Mojeek, with a little bit of info on clustering: https://blog.mojeek.com/2023/02/are-search-engines-deleting-the-web.html

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 08-Jun-2023 23:20:55 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Hyolobrika
     @Hyolobrika >is there any way part of the internet can be deleted?
     Nope, as a bunch of IP packets being blasted around cannot be "deleted".
     
     IANA delegates the allocation of IP addresses, so they could "withdraw" IP addresses if they wanted, but they usually don't do that (IP addresses are really just a number and delegation should really be just so two computers don't unintentionally end up with the same IP address).
     
     If an upstream was to start playing around with BGP and routing tables, routing to AS's could be broken, but it'll be a lot faster and more effective just to unplug any upstream links from the upstream side.
   • Embed this notice
     hyolobrika@berserker.town's status on Thursday, 08-Jun-2023 23:20:56 JST Hyolobrika

     in reply to

     @Mojeek this makes me wonder: is there any way part of the internet can be deleted?
     The root DNS zone (and lower zones) can delete domains below it, but the IP addresses are still there so sites and services removed that way are not truly gone.
     Can't the same be done with IP addresses?

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 08-Jun-2023 23:22:33 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Hyolobrika
     @Hyolobrika I would say GNUnet is better: https://www.gnunet.org/
   • Embed this notice
     hyolobrika@berserker.town's status on Thursday, 08-Jun-2023 23:22:34 JST Hyolobrika

     in reply to

     @Mojeek https://reticulum.network/ fixes this

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 08-Jun-2023 23:57:32 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Hyolobrika
     @Hyolobrika I would say merely because GNUnet is a GNU project and is under fine copyleft licenses and not under the less free MIT expat (as that license seems to overstep and say that copyright law applies to merely using software).
     
     Another reason is that it looks like reticulum is developed on the proprietary github (a huge red flag that something is amiss).
     
     Going at the technical angle, GNUnet is both a networking stack and also a set of application protocols on top (including a DNS replacement), with decent performance (as most of the software is written in C).
     
     Meanwhile, Reticulum seems to be "only" a networking stack and is written in mostly python (which should be fine for small amounts of packets, but performance will becomes a problem if you want to route a huge amount of packets).
   • Embed this notice
     hyolobrika@berserker.town's status on Thursday, 08-Jun-2023 23:57:33 JST Hyolobrika

     in reply to

     • 翠星石

     @Suiseiseki
     Why?

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Friday, 09-Jun-2023 00:01:07 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Hyolobrika
     @Hyolobrika >But they could.
     Maybe, but that would just really force everyone to do away with a body for IP allocation and go with purely cryptographic means.
     
     >Idk wym by that
     You can break internet connections by playing around with the routing tables, but going to physically unplug the internet connection on the upstream routers, or bringing the interface down remotely will cut off any internet connection far quicker.
   • Embed this notice
     hyolobrika@berserker.town's status on Friday, 09-Jun-2023 00:01:09 JST Hyolobrika

     in reply to

     • 翠星石

     @Suiseiseki
     >but they usually don't do that
     But they could.

     >If an upstream was to start playing around with BGP and routing tables, routing to AS's could be broken, but it'll be a lot faster and more effective just to unplug any upstream links from the upstream side.
     Idk wym by that