Hi!
On 12:58 Tue 18 Jan , David Barrett wrote:
> On 01/18/2011 12:05 PM, Michael Blizek wrote:
...
> >>2) An app launches, whether you're on Mac, Windows, Linux, iPad, whatever.
> >
> >This will not work. Cor is currently linux only. Users of other operating
> >systems can still use it, by getting a router letting the router translate
> >between TCP/IP and cor. This will probably be a common use.
> >
> >You will also need to install the cor software yourself in most cases...
>
> Ah, then you're screwed.
>
> Wireless meshes require high node density, which means Windows and Mac.
This is why I have written that in many cases the operating system will be
running unmodified with a router being the gateway. I do not see a point in
why the computers as part of the mesh anyway. If they can use the mesh as
clients or servers this is enough. The forwarding nodes should be on 24/7,
otherwise the network will always be down at certain times of days.
Linux only will not be a problem for mobile phones either, because many of
them run linux. Most other embedded devices do so as well. Notebooks will
have to resort to access points.
The code is open source, any volunteer who want to port it to other operating
systems is free to do it. Please send me an email, if you know how to do this
(or are willing to find out) and have some time left. In the meantime I will
continue doing this on linux.
> >>9) You have a vast interface to browse the photos, videos, songs,
> >>updates, profile information, and basically a lot of stuff about
> >>everybody around you. The USB dongle is used to install on a new
> >>computer, and connect directly without the internet, but even
> >>without the dongle an installed computer can continue to participate
> >>in the mesh via the internet.
> >
> >Cor is *not* about social networks. It is about forwarding data to hosts
> >which are not connected locally. You can build on top of it whatever you
> >want.
>
> That's like saying Car is not about moving people. It's about
> moving cargo in oblong 50-300lbs units; you can build on top of it
> whatever you want.
What I want to tell you is that cor is not *content*. If is a way to
transfer data. I guess most people will not be interested is this kind of
social network, if there are 100000 other networks as well and most of them
allow global contact. Most people will probably just want an internet
connection.
If you think I am wrong, you are free to build yourself whatever you want. I
do want to invest any ressources to build yet another social network, just
because everybody else does so too.
> The point is: nobody wants to build on top of Cor. They want to
> share files. Until it solves a real problem that people actually
> have, it doesn't solve a real problem that people actually have.
I doubt that social networking is a problem that people really have. Even if
you do not like any "social networking" site, there are more than enough
other communication ressources left: email, irc, jabber/xmpp or IM in general,
nntp, web sites, boards, blogs, audio/video streams, phone, and others. I do
not see any *real* problem unresolved. That is besides If you do so, I very
much invite you to start an open source project yourself.
> >>10) If any particular computer gets lost or compromised, you can
> >>unfriend them (or remove just that device) immediately.
> >>Furthermore, your node is configured to monitor unfriending to
> >>automatically "quarantine" any node that has become suspect. (For
> >>example, one of my friends lost his iPhone; he'd remove that device
> >>from his profile and my devices would stop talking with it, without
> >>any involvement from me.)
> >
> >This is only effective, if:
> >1) Your friend does not have any cached data on the device
> >2) The unfriending happens before the attacker makes use abuses the data
>
> Again, you're not thinking like a user. If you took that mentality
> to everything, you'd never leave the house. Nobody expects
> perfection, don't get hung up on trying to create it.
Well I think the problem is that people *do* expect perfection. We have tons
of stuff which is close to perfection, but has this tiny flaw that renders it
completely useless for lots of applications. Look e.g. at how many cameras do
not have a mic or line in...
Besides I do not think that stolen devices are a problem at all, if compared
to e.g. virus attacks. Many people will not even guess that they are
compromised - and if they do, they will silently remove that virus, if they
can. If you want to stop abuse of private data, you have to teach people to
*not* share them without thought. Currently they do not even understand why
uploading it to the cloud is a bad idea...
> >>11) And because your USB dongle is owned by you, it can store data
> >>such as your private key so you can easily move it between computers
> >>-- or even quickly access your mesh using someone else's computer,
> >>without leaving any trace on the computer itself.
> >
> >You mean that you want to boot from this USB dongle? Even then, if the owner
> >of the computer wants to attack you, he can and there is little you can do
> >against it. Think about attaching a firewire cable to that computer and
> >reading/manipulating the memory via DMA...
>
> Anybody sufficiently equipped and motivated to do that, wouldn't.
> They'd just put a bag over your head and interrogate you.
Maybe... But interrogate does not mean that they will get anything at all. Or
maybe its not government, but just an ememy or you who wants to spy... or some
kid who wants to have fun and then uploads your data to the net...
> >>Anyway, ultimately I think mesh technology will be far less
> >>important than mesh *usability*. It needs to be packaged up with
> >>really simple, excellent software that enables the most basic peer
> >>activities -- especially file transfer -- to be done in a totally
> >>seamless way
> >
> >I do not think that technology will be of little importance. Currently meshes
> >have a *very* low capacity. Bandwidth requirements are constantly growing and
> >hardware/time will not help us here.
>
> You've raised a bunch of completely irrelevant concerns that merely
> demonstrate my point. By caring about a bunch of things that don't
> matter to real people, you're ignoring the much simpler and more
> important things about which they do care. That's why nobody will
> ever use what you build, and you'll whine when somebody makes
> something 1% as powerful and complex, but that happens to actually
> be useful to real people.
>
> I'm sorry to phrase it so strongly and antagonistically. But this
> is my point: technology is not the bottleneck. It's not even the
> hard part -- not by a wide margin. If we devoted half as much time
> actually polishing this stuff up for real world use as we did
> solving the next esoteric edge case, we'd have had all this years
> ago.
I think you are thinking of social networks and not "mesh" networks. This is
OK for me, but this is *not* *my* *goal*. Sorry about this. I do not see any
problem with mixing them. But as said I do not want to but any ressources into
this and would very much encourage you to start a project on your own.
-Michi
--
programing a layer 3+4 network protocol for mesh networks
see http://michaelblizek.twilightparadox.com
_______________________________________________
p2p-hackers mailing list
p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
