You seem to be somewhat in the know. What's the law/enforcement landscape look like for sending digital signals via CB?
I ask, because I've had this idea in my head of setting up a decentralized internet alternative via inexpensive(read: used) wifi routers, but the problem is covering long distances as these kind of routers don't really have that kind of range.
I'm wondering if it would be possible to convert the signals to something that would show up as noise on Citizen Band to transmit the signal farther...
I don't know about that. I suppose it's possible, and quick bursts might be hard to trace. Perhaps switching channels or using different channels each way would work.
I do know that packet radio is used on ham radio for digital content.
In the past, people have considered ad hoc networks using wifi. You'd be surprised at the range of wifi using directional antennas, such as old Directv dishes or even an ancient 10 foot satellite dish. Search the internet and you can find plans for making a cheap "cantenna" from a tin can. Here's just one: https://www.wikihow.com/Make-a-Cantenna
My concern is if something like this is to be a viable alternative to the internet, it needs to overcome distance problems for a number of reasons, including initial low-user adoption, but also, as it (theoretically) grows, geographic barriers such as oceans or other uninhabited or minimally inhabited areas.
Dont get me wrong, I don't want to abandon the current internet, but much like with dot win, having a lifeboat of sorts would be a good idea, especially if certain fascistic elements within governments get their way...
Most people here in the US rarely communicate with anything outside the US on the internet. Almost every single website I use is here. Everyone I know is here. So communications across oceans don't have to be constant.
For the US to contact Europe via wifi networks, you merely need some satellite dish wifi relays across Alaska to Russia and then across Russia to Europe. If that's what it came down to, it could be made to happen.
Also, even if the internet as it exists is taken down, the undersea cables will still be there. All that is needed is to secure access to the cable landing points.
It would be a big job, so we might bring the internet back up on our own terms more quickly than starting a whole new system, other than for local areas.
Communicate maybe, but there are a lot of other services and sites in foreign countries it'd be a shame to lose... (coughpiecoughcoughratcoughbeicoughcoughcough)
Besides while we certainly need to focus on ourselves first, if we can help foreignbros along the way, so much the better...
even if the internet as it exists is taken down, the undersea cables will still be there
I'm less worried about the internet getting shut down and more worried about it becoming the hugbox the left so desperately wants everything to be, honestly...
Older modems used telephone lines, sometimes they also used dedicated lines from one location to another (ie: from a college in Chicago to one in Detroit), but in theory if you got along with your neighbors, you could set up an intranet that way. You need to do some research on the tech, though.
What I'm thinking is you have an old router, so you put a special custom firmware on it and set up a webserver on it and share it to your neighbors. one of them sees it, likes it, so they set up an old router and a server and spread the signal further, while also adding new content to the network.
That would essentially be an intranet, with no access to the internet, the world wide web. I mean the idea of a decentralized internet sounds fantastic to me, but how would you actually connect to it?
I'm thinking wifi would be the easiest way. you can find cheap routers at thrift stores these days that will take custom firmware. there's plenty of free server solutions you could slap on a used computer (linux basically is a server OS, but there's also apache webserver, and I think even Whinedohs has server options built in at this point).
What I'm envisioning is a peer-to-peer network built (at least at first) on existing protocols and hardware to create a decentralized architecture. The advantages that come to mind would be that it would be harder to take down and it would only cost an initial investment to get setup (no monthly service fees).
The downsides would be everybody would have to maintain their own hardware and some people might end up getting bogged down if they were in a primary route over long distances, not to mention the issue of covering long distances of people who aren't yet on the network/geographic barriers like large bodies of water, etc.
Most of this is theoretical of course. More robust protocols and some sort of block-chain-like transfer protocol might be needed to glue all the pieces together...
How would you be able to access new information, instead of what's currently on the intranet? We need to figure out how to access it, then offer free access. We don't really know what Starlink is for, but if something can be built with that concept with the end goal of being free internet, then it's something that should be pursued, with all the bitching from telecom companies falling on deaf ears.
How would you be able to access new information, instead of what's currently on the intranet?
People would add information over time, the same way they did with the early internet, except now we'd be a step ahead in terms of what services to offer.
Eventually, as with the internet itself, major brands would have to adopt the new network or fall behind competitors, much like they did with the og internet. The big difference being that with no major hubs to bottleneck bandwidth, it would be harder for a few big players to control the whole thing
you can also modify a regular router with custom firmware that allows it to act as a repeater, but what happens if you have a gap between users? (oceans come to mind, although what if you have a gap from city A to cityB with no users in between?) wifi has somewhat limited range, so you need some way to bridge those gaps effectively if you want to avoid dependence on big buisiness/government infrastructure.
Setting up mesh networks is one of the newer things going on. Also really configuring guest SSiD to do extra stuff ( share files / act as hangouts / etc )
You seem to be somewhat in the know. What's the law/enforcement landscape look like for sending digital signals via CB?
I ask, because I've had this idea in my head of setting up a decentralized internet alternative via inexpensive(read: used) wifi routers, but the problem is covering long distances as these kind of routers don't really have that kind of range.
I'm wondering if it would be possible to convert the signals to something that would show up as noise on Citizen Band to transmit the signal farther...
WRT meshnet
wonder if they could be repurposed to work on CB bands without spamming the bandwidth... I'd hate to kill a frequency for other people...
I don't know about that. I suppose it's possible, and quick bursts might be hard to trace. Perhaps switching channels or using different channels each way would work.
I do know that packet radio is used on ham radio for digital content.
In the past, people have considered ad hoc networks using wifi. You'd be surprised at the range of wifi using directional antennas, such as old Directv dishes or even an ancient 10 foot satellite dish. Search the internet and you can find plans for making a cheap "cantenna" from a tin can. Here's just one: https://www.wikihow.com/Make-a-Cantenna
lol, I've used similar before.
My concern is if something like this is to be a viable alternative to the internet, it needs to overcome distance problems for a number of reasons, including initial low-user adoption, but also, as it (theoretically) grows, geographic barriers such as oceans or other uninhabited or minimally inhabited areas.
Dont get me wrong, I don't want to abandon the current internet, but much like with dot win, having a lifeboat of sorts would be a good idea, especially if certain fascistic elements within governments get their way...
Most people here in the US rarely communicate with anything outside the US on the internet. Almost every single website I use is here. Everyone I know is here. So communications across oceans don't have to be constant.
For the US to contact Europe via wifi networks, you merely need some satellite dish wifi relays across Alaska to Russia and then across Russia to Europe. If that's what it came down to, it could be made to happen.
Also, even if the internet as it exists is taken down, the undersea cables will still be there. All that is needed is to secure access to the cable landing points.
It would be a big job, so we might bring the internet back up on our own terms more quickly than starting a whole new system, other than for local areas.
Communicate maybe, but there are a lot of other services and sites in foreign countries it'd be a shame to lose... (coughpiecoughcoughratcoughbeicoughcoughcough)
Besides while we certainly need to focus on ourselves first, if we can help foreignbros along the way, so much the better...
I'm less worried about the internet getting shut down and more worried about it becoming the hugbox the left so desperately wants everything to be, honestly...
Interesting idea! Could you use old-school modems for something like that? Didn't they use bings and bongs to transmit data via analog lines?
Older modems used telephone lines, sometimes they also used dedicated lines from one location to another (ie: from a college in Chicago to one in Detroit), but in theory if you got along with your neighbors, you could set up an intranet that way. You need to do some research on the tech, though.
What I'm thinking is you have an old router, so you put a special custom firmware on it and set up a webserver on it and share it to your neighbors. one of them sees it, likes it, so they set up an old router and a server and spread the signal further, while also adding new content to the network.
That would essentially be an intranet, with no access to the internet, the world wide web. I mean the idea of a decentralized internet sounds fantastic to me, but how would you actually connect to it?
I'm thinking wifi would be the easiest way. you can find cheap routers at thrift stores these days that will take custom firmware. there's plenty of free server solutions you could slap on a used computer (linux basically is a server OS, but there's also apache webserver, and I think even Whinedohs has server options built in at this point).
What I'm envisioning is a peer-to-peer network built (at least at first) on existing protocols and hardware to create a decentralized architecture. The advantages that come to mind would be that it would be harder to take down and it would only cost an initial investment to get setup (no monthly service fees).
The downsides would be everybody would have to maintain their own hardware and some people might end up getting bogged down if they were in a primary route over long distances, not to mention the issue of covering long distances of people who aren't yet on the network/geographic barriers like large bodies of water, etc.
Most of this is theoretical of course. More robust protocols and some sort of block-chain-like transfer protocol might be needed to glue all the pieces together...
How would you be able to access new information, instead of what's currently on the intranet? We need to figure out how to access it, then offer free access. We don't really know what Starlink is for, but if something can be built with that concept with the end goal of being free internet, then it's something that should be pursued, with all the bitching from telecom companies falling on deaf ears.
People would add information over time, the same way they did with the early internet, except now we'd be a step ahead in terms of what services to offer.
Eventually, as with the internet itself, major brands would have to adopt the new network or fall behind competitors, much like they did with the og internet. The big difference being that with no major hubs to bottleneck bandwidth, it would be harder for a few big players to control the whole thing
Lookup Repeaters.
They’re all over.
you can also modify a regular router with custom firmware that allows it to act as a repeater, but what happens if you have a gap between users? (oceans come to mind, although what if you have a gap from city A to cityB with no users in between?) wifi has somewhat limited range, so you need some way to bridge those gaps effectively if you want to avoid dependence on big buisiness/government infrastructure.
Checkout some of the features of Tomato / Merlin / DD-WRT
https://dd-wrt.com/
Setting up mesh networks is one of the newer things going on. Also really configuring guest SSiD to do extra stuff ( share files / act as hangouts / etc )
Clearly I've been out of the loop too long lol.
Thanks, ill have to look into it