Alaska is more hardcore than australia. Great whites don't come over here because killer whales will fuck their shit up.
Enjoy all the great whites coming to your shitty desert country to prey upon you stupid surfing aussies.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 0:04
>>14 aw, but you are almost a part of canada, so that's not so bad =D and sharks eat jellyfish ? so...
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 0:25
>>1 If somebody saves a decryption key there, you are fucked, because of DMCA/SOPA shit.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 1:18
>>16 but you could easily split the key over multiple ip's, or even an xor 0 might be enough... You'd expect most things that don't need to be in-the-clear would be encrypted anyway =)
The time now is Fri May 30, 2014 9:20 pm The Boulder Church Forum Index
?
Name:
bittorrent for key exchange2014-05-31 3:50
bittorrent for key exchange
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 4:09
Users from your country are not permitted to browse this site.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 6:14
what do you think of a network similar to tor but all users also contribute as nodes? Would it be viable? Would it have any advantages over the way tor is? Easier or more difficult to block? There is a problem if illegal shit is coming out of your computer. Maybe the users could contribute as relay nodes. End to end encrypted communication within the network could stay within the user nodes. You are only liable for content that exits the network.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 6:22
>>25 I think that is how the GNUnet works, or at least very similar.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 6:57
>>25 That's exactly I2P's model. All users are participants by default, the I2P software is a router and forwards traffic / creates tunnel / contributes to the netDB / etc.
By default I2P only communicates with other routers and not with clearnet so you stay safe since no one can tell what traffic your router is ever passing, hence the I2P network is solely internal and for darknet (eepsite) use.
There is an outproxy that proxies your requests to clearnet but that's implemented as an application level server, just like a regular proxy.
>>28 Nothing wrong with that as long as the java implementation is secure. I can't vouch for openjdk but it could become secure in theory, as long as oracle leaves it alone. If not, then isolate the java libraries used, provide c/c++ implementations and compile the java to c or c++.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 8:23
>>29 Well for one thing, it requires the installation of the JRE.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 8:26
Assuming that the Internet had become popular with character-based interfaces rather than multimedia-enhanced hypertext documents, its technical timeline would have become somewhat different. Terminal emulators would have eventually accumulated features in the same way as Netscape-like browsers did in the real world. RIPscrip is a real-world example of what could have become dominant: graphics images, GUI components and even sound and video on top of a dumb terminal connection. "Dynamic content" wouldn't require horrible kludges such as "AJAX" or "dynamic HTML", as the dumb terminal approach would have been interactive and dynamic enough to begin with. The gap between graphical and text-based applications would be narrower, as well as the gap between "pre-web" and "modern" online culture.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 8:48
>>30 Not necessarily. Java is just a language. As long as you can provide the standard libraries you can do whatever you want with code written in java.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 8:57
>>32 But that requires even more hassle than JRE installation. I just want a simple native package that can be downloaded, compiled in a minute, and used like any other software.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 8:59
>>33 JRE as provided by SUN Oracle is a buggy piece of shit and giving it access to a port is asking to get owned.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 9:09
>>34 But openJDK is even worse. That's why I'm baffled there's no I2P implementation in a sensible language.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-31 9:18
>>35 I thought it would be. I guess the project was started when java had more hope behind it.
>>27 I guess the only disadvantage this has over the tor model is i2p users get to find out the ips of some other i2p users. This can be done with tor as well as a malicious individual could run a tor entry node and record ips. But with the user -> user model it's as easy to find as bittorrent. But assuming the adversary can subvert isps, this doesn't matter anyways.
>>38 Yeah, we really need new ISP-disruptive technologies isn't it =D Everybody else happily shares their networking hardware, why charge so much for ``just the first hop''