Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
1278 Followers
WordsAreForNerds
229 Followers
Jendral Cabe Merah
11 Followers
Ashwin Prabhu
156 Followers
Ian Sutherland
168 Followers
mlivetechFeb 16, 2011
a very nice discussion.
galesongFeb 16, 2011
nice !!!
diggpopoFeb 16, 2011
This comment has given me insight to this article I never would have considered.
ChristopherRandallFeb 16, 2011
I'de love to read the story, but what's with all the popup junk.
ctraiderthe1stFeb 17, 2011
No popups or ads for me.
agmlauncherFeb 16, 2011
I don't understand how this fundamentally fixes the need to host files/scripts, and databases that make those files/scripts work.
A website is little more than a database of information, with a User Interface that makes that information accessible to people. To do this, you need to store the data and the user interface files (html files, script files, CSS files).
So how do these Freedom Boxes replace the client-server nature of websites?
They sound more like small proxy servers rather than replacements to the client-server system.
addiktionFeb 17, 2011
I don't think they are intended to be a full blown replacement for the browser client/server model.
However using Tonido as an example because its the only one I use, you can download the software and people can access your content without needing a website or host of some sort to store the information some where. You can write blog articles, put up photos, backup files, give access to your music in a P2P network with other Tonido users or guest accounts if you like.
You obviously still have to use the existing infrastructure created for the internet so its not a full blown solution in circumventing control seeing how ISPs are the gateways anyhow.
mattbdFeb 17, 2011
These are really small multi-purpose servers - sounds like they include a mail server, web server, and proxy server, among others. I think the idea is to make it much more decentralised and take the balance of power away from governments and corporations, and pass it back to individuals.
Take email, for instance. Most people will use either their ISP's mail servers, or a webmail service such as Gmail, Hotmail etc. At work they'll use the email service provided by their employer. In other words, every time they send or receive an email they're placing that information in the hands of a company (or a government if, say, they work for a government department). So they're dependent on the good behaviour of that company or government to keep that data secure, respect their privacy and not misuse it. There are, however, plenty of cases where governments and companies have not done that.
Running your own mail server, on the other hand, means you don't have to entrust your information to a third party. You can take responsibility for it yourself. And if it's encrypted, as they want this to be, you can be reasonably sure that no-one but you has access to it.
Also, the idea of a distributed social network has a lot of merit, and these could be the basis of one. Host your own profile page on your own machine, have it link to your friend's self-hosted pages and share data with them through an API of some kind. The idea has a lot of merit, and I look forward to seeing how it progresses.
opticbitFeb 17, 2011
important parts.
http://freenetproject.org/
http://www.locustworld.com/
http://www.bitcoin.org
tyhoFeb 17, 2011
Good read that left me hopeful for the coming future. Notable qote:
"The point of these Freedom servers is to address the privacy and control issues of “social networking and digital communications technologies, [which] are now critical to people fighting to make freedom in their societies or simply trying to preserve their privacy where the Web and other parts of the Net are intensively surveilled by profit-seekers and government agencies.” This needs to be done “Because smartphones, mobile tablets, and other common forms of consumer electronics are being built as ‘platforms’ to control their users and monitor their activity.”
isuzu14bFeb 17, 2011
I barely understand, but i like the idea of decentralizing the internet.
bcronosFeb 17, 2011
"I, for one, am going to be watching this project very closely. To maintain true freedom, the world needs Internet systems under the control of the people and not just governments and corporations."
Amen.
DavidallennFeb 17, 2011
Its a fantastic news and as we know internet have dominate everyone and our totally work depend on it.
mikedothFeb 17, 2011
Personally I like the idea behind the TonidoPlug and had the PogoPlug for a short time, have a private cloud that friends/family can connect to is great. However i'm unsure if my internet connection can handle too much traffic... another thought is that this software they offer is some kind of VPN, although I couldn't find any info on it.
efrizzzFeb 17, 2011
nice
koushiroFeb 17, 2011
Hmmm, this hopefully will start to grow in popularity. Need to save up some cash to get one of those cool little plug in servers too!
eyecomeanonFeb 17, 2011
This is a great idea that won't work for a couple of reasons.
1) No money. Without big corporations backing the effort, the hardware won't be built unless it's all off the shelf.
2) Laziness. Let's face it, the average internet user is lazy. They don't want to have to go through the hassle of configuring things that a server would need, or doing any of the maintenance. Most of them wouldn't know how in the first place, and of those that do, even a large percentage of them would rather not. Sometimes you just want to sit down at your computer and have it work, without worrying about protocols or settings or whether your firewall is secure.
3) Mostly, lack of knowledge. Unless they can make this thing secure and easy to set up for the average (read: moronic) user, not enough people will use it to matter. Put another way, unless your 60 year old mother (or grandmother) can figure this s**t out, it won't get used.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jqp123Feb 17, 2011
It won't work ... because there is no real idea.
All he has is some sort of vague concept involving encrypted communications and cheap plug based servers --- which may or may not have the hardware resources needed to support his vague concept.
This won't work for the same reason that Google Wave didn't work --- it fails the concise explanation test. If you can't explain what it is, what it does and why people need it in a few sentences, you don't really have a product ready for the mass market.
Personally, I think the lawyer should stick to lawyering.
mattbdFeb 17, 2011
1) It is pretty much off the shelf. Plug computers have been around for a while, and companies are selling them and making money off them. I have a Pogoplug that I've installed Debian Squeeze on and it's got perfectly reasonable system specs for a relatively low-use headless (256MB RAM, and an ARM processor). It's more than adequate for running a web server, a mail server and a few other services. Also, the cost is probably going to go down over time as more people buy the things, and hardware gets better all the time.
2) While my setup was a lot of hassle, if you just use a Pogoplug for what it's designed for, it couldn't be simpler. You connect it to the mains, connect it to your router, connect up whatever storage devices you want to use with it, sign up at the Pogoplug website and you're done. The service is kind of like a self-hosted version of Dropbox, and it's certainly not any harder to use than that.
3) It can easily be that simple - see above. The earliest plug computers tended to run regular Linux distros, but the Pogoplug uses its own embedded Linux. You can log into it via SSH if you really want to (which is why it's such a great hackable device), but you interact with it through the web interface or via the desktop applications for it.
mrteflonFeb 17, 2011
Skynet!
mattbdFeb 17, 2011
It would be great if they could integrate powerline networking and/or mesh networking into the device. That would be a truly awesome way to ensure that no government could deny users access to the network the way the Egyptian government did recently.
ChristopherRandallFeb 18, 2011
I'm give it another shot, thanks