NLnet has awarded grants totaling €675,000 to eleven open-source projects focused on reclaiming the public internet. These projects aim to develop and improve decentralized, privacy-respecting alternatives to centralized platforms and services. The funded initiatives cover areas like peer-to-peer communication, distributed social networking, censorship-resistant content distribution, and decentralized identity management, all contributing to a more democratic and resilient online experience. The grants are part of NLnet's Commons Fund, which supports initiatives that foster open standards, protocols, and infrastructure.
Thai authorities are systematically using online doxxing to intimidate and silence critics. The Citizen Lab report details how government agencies, particularly the Royal Thai Army, leverage social media and messaging platforms to collect and disseminate personal information of dissidents. This information, including names, addresses, family details, and affiliations, is then weaponized to publicly shame, harass, and threaten individuals online, fostering a climate of fear and self-censorship. The report highlights the coordinated nature of these campaigns, often involving fake accounts and coordinated posting, and the chilling effect they have on freedom of expression in Thailand.
HN commenters discuss the chilling effect of doxxing and online harassment campaigns orchestrated by Thai authorities to silence dissent, particularly targeting young activists. Some express concern about the increasing sophistication of these tactics, including the use of seemingly grassroots social media campaigns to amplify the harassment and create an environment of fear. Others highlight the vulnerability of individuals lacking strong digital security practices, and the difficulty of holding perpetrators accountable. The conversation also touches on broader themes of internet freedom, the role of social media platforms in facilitating such campaigns, and the potential for similar tactics to be employed by other authoritarian regimes. Several commenters draw parallels to other countries where governments utilize online harassment and disinformation to suppress political opposition. Finally, there's a brief discussion of potential countermeasures and the importance of supporting organizations that protect digital rights and online privacy.
Briar is a messaging app designed for high-security and censored environments. It uses peer-to-peer encryption, meaning messages are exchanged directly between devices rather than through a central server. This decentralized approach eliminates single points of failure and surveillance. Briar can connect directly via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi in proximity, or through the Tor network for more distant contacts, further enhancing privacy. Users add contacts by scanning a QR code or sharing a link. While Briar prioritizes security, it also supports blogs and forums, fostering community building in challenging situations.
Hacker News users discussed Briar's reliance on Tor for peer discovery, expressing concerns about its speed and reliability. Some questioned the practicality of Bluetooth and Wi-Fi mesh networking as a fallback, doubting its range and usability. Others were interested in the technical details of Briar's implementation, particularly its use of SQLite and the lack of end-to-end encryption for blog posts. The closed-source nature of the Android app was also raised as a potential issue, despite the project being open source overall. Several commenters compared Briar to other secure messaging apps like Signal and Session, highlighting trade-offs between usability and security. Finally, there was some discussion of the project's funding and its potential use cases in high-risk environments.
This 2010 essay argues that running a nonfree program on your server, even for personal use, compromises your freedom and contributes to a broader system of user subjugation. While seemingly a private act, hosting proprietary software empowers the software's developer to control your computing, potentially through surveillance, restrictions on usage, or even remote bricking. This reinforces the developer's power over all users, making it harder for free software alternatives to gain traction. By choosing free software, you reclaim control over your server and contribute to a freer digital world for everyone.
HN users largely agree with the article's premise that "personal" devices like "smart" TVs, phones, and even "networked" appliances primarily serve their manufacturers, not the user. Commenters point out the data collection practices of these devices, noting how they send usage data, location information, and even recordings back to corporations. Some users discuss the difficulty of mitigating this data leakage, mentioning custom firmware, self-hosting, and network segregation. Others lament the lack of consumer awareness and the acceptance of these practices as the norm. A few comments highlight the irony of "smart" devices often being less functional and convenient due to their dependence on external servers and frequent updates. The idea of truly owning one's devices versus merely licensing them is also debated. Overall, the thread reflects a shared concern about the erosion of privacy and user control in the age of connected devices.
The Substack post details how DeepSeek, a video search engine with content filtering, can be circumvented by encoding potentially censored keywords as hexadecimal strings. Because DeepSeek decodes hex before applying its filters, a search for "0x736578" (hex for "sex") will return results that a direct search for "sex" might block. The post argues this reveals a flaw in DeepSeek's censorship implementation, demonstrating that filtering based purely on keyword matching is easily bypassed with simple encoding techniques. This highlights the limitations of automated content moderation and the potential for unintended consequences when relying on simplistic filtering methods.
Hacker News users discuss potential censorship evasion techniques, prompted by an article detailing how DeepSeek, a coder-focused search engine, appears to suppress results related to specific topics. Several commenters explore the idea of encoding sensitive queries in hexadecimal format as a workaround. However, skepticism arises regarding the long-term effectiveness of such a tactic, predicting that DeepSeek would likely adapt and detect such encoding methods. The discussion also touches upon the broader implications of censorship in code search engines, with some arguing that DeepSeek's approach might hinder access to valuable information while others emphasize the platform's right to curate its content. The efficacy and ethics of censorship are debated, with no clear consensus emerging. A few comments delve into alternative evasion strategies and the general limitations of censorship in a determined community.
Summary of Comments ( 177 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43769482
Hacker News commenters generally expressed support for NLnet's funding of open-source internet infrastructure projects. Several highlighted the importance of decentralization and moving away from reliance on large corporations. Some questioned the viability or impact of certain projects, particularly Matrix, while others championed its potential. A few commenters discussed the challenges of funding and sustaining open-source projects long-term, suggesting alternative funding mechanisms and emphasizing the need for community involvement. There was also a thread discussing the definition of "public internet" and whether these projects genuinely contribute to it.
The Hacker News post "Open Source Projects Receive Funding to Reclaim the Public Internet" (linking to an NLnet foundation grants announcement) generated several comments discussing the funded projects and the overall initiative.
Several commenters expressed enthusiasm for specific projects. One commenter highlighted the "Public money, public code" approach being taken by the Guix project, praising its commitment to software freedom and transparency. They further emphasized the importance of reproducible builds in ensuring the integrity and verifiability of software. Another user expressed excitement about the funding awarded to Qubes OS, citing its unique security model based on virtualization. They saw this as a crucial step towards strengthening online privacy and security. Another commenter, seemingly familiar with Qubes, added that the funding is particularly relevant given the recent surge in sophisticated malware attacks.
There was a discussion around the significance of funding open-source infrastructure projects. A commenter emphasized the crucial, yet often overlooked, role of such projects in underpinning the internet. They pointed out how these projects often operate with limited resources and how such funding can significantly impact their sustainability and development. This sentiment was echoed by another user who lamented the historical underfunding of public infrastructure in the digital realm, expressing hope that initiatives like NLnet's would pave the way for a more robust and publicly owned internet infrastructure.
One commenter focused on the legal aspects of open source, drawing attention to the importance of licenses and emphasizing their role in guaranteeing software freedoms. They expressed concern that without proper licensing, the positive impact of such funding could be diminished.
Several users engaged in a discussion about the technical merits of different projects. One thread discussed the complexities of decentralized systems and their potential to address issues of censorship and control. Another thread debated the advantages and disadvantages of particular software development methodologies.
Finally, some commenters broadened the discussion to the larger philosophical implications of a "public internet." They discussed the ongoing tension between centralized platforms and decentralized alternatives, and the importance of initiatives like this in promoting a more open and democratic internet. They viewed funding for open-source projects as a crucial step towards reclaiming the internet as a public good, rather than a space dominated by corporate interests.