[Freedombox-discuss] Freedom Box as the server for other projects' protocols

nathan nolast nathan1465 at gmail.com
Sun Jul 10 22:19:59 UTC 2011


arnt the current protocols and the networks inheritly insecure (privacy
sense) which is the reason why we need a new network based off of new
protocols. i agree that the freedombox should be easily able to setup a
diaspora pod, tor node ect ect. but in the same aspect, shouldn't it be very
easy to set up some internal freedombox/debain based solution like a
decentralised DNS service, used to relay messages, darknets, ect ect. sure
it could do all, but by default it has to do something, or else it would be
to complicated for the average (grandma rule) user to configure. And please
dont bash any more conversation about identifying average users, the
terminology used, or the politics of ...


the freedombox has to be unique, it has to be compelling to new users. Why
would someone buy a plug server and start using a freedombox, only to use
solutions that are obtainable through other cheaper methods.


On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 11:45 PM, ya knygar <knygar at gmail.com> wrote:

> >  Neither, both.  Freedom Box should be capable of being a
> >  Diaspora node, and also be capable of being a DFRN server.
>
> i think so,
> for example FreedomBox Foundation have the power to encourage XMPP networks
> use,
> make a distributed Search stack based on something like
>
> http://abmargb.blogspot.com/2011/06/pub-sub-search-engine-progress-report.html
> and ..profit!
>
>
> But it seems not fair for networks who don't use/like XMPP
> and not efficient for evolution of FSW generally,
>
> (let's name it, people on W3C doing a fair
> amount of work to sum-up and make a Web federated, as a "highest instance"
> of
> Internet - W3C, in the end, takes a responsibility on open and
> re-useful Web schemes
> to be widely used, given the p2p in browser initiative - supported by
> W3C for defending
> the same principals - FreedomBox Foundation is for (from what i'v heard)
> http://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc-charter.html
> http://wwwery.com/2011/05/06/p2p-on-browsers/
> also - http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-ccxml-20110705/
> http://public.webfoundation.org/2011/01/MW4D_WS/report
> kind of work;
> i think - Foundation should work back-to-back with W3C at least in certain
> areas
> as browser based p2p is an easiest way to help the goals of Freedom even on
> systems that won't use GNU/Linux, FreedomBoxes could easily be a
> desirable hosters
> and trusties for these and other web apps as first of all -
> Proprietary Cloud is Apps Cloud)
>
>
> I think - what is particularly great in Debian project is diversity of
> distributives based on it,
> but - another particular strength of Debian at least with FreedomBox
> initiative - is an ideological emphasis
> on Freedom (including Privacy and Security) and defense of it. That
> introduces the path.
>
> but there are many ways (you know):
>
> - making a FreedomBox distributive for one social network protocol
> with one persistence model
> - another network another model
> - "dissident" mode dist
> - "provider" dist
> - "track me fully, i love you" mode dist
> - "i use only GNU" dist
> - "i want non-track-able AugmentedReality!"
> - Ultimate FreedomBox in bullet-proof environment.
> etc.etc.
>
>
> Approach of a "buy 4GFreedomBox for your garage" is good for someone.
> Plug-server (i hope not - under the bed)
> Approach of Construct; Install; Decide; is good for someone.
> Approach of pre-installed package is good..
> Approach of FBox  from  Cloud...
> live-CD's/Live-Flash's/LiveHDD's/CloudOS's/Embedded
>
> all these have many potential users,
> i see,
> and many - may need a specific codebase.
>
> Another variant for people who would make a hardware Boxes that
> compatible with next level of Freedom needs:
> Portable FreedomBoxes > Wireless Boxes
>
> Portable + Wireless = Mobile FreedomBoxes!
> that one is particularly important as mobiles is where is the
> worst situation now.
>
>
>
> For a Packaging of FreedomBox i see
>
> 1. A viable variant in which every social network initiative
> and other biggest formed "groups of interest"
> providing a help for their own "dist",
> and core-base of dists are all provisioned by experienced
> GNU/Debian/FBX contributors.
> That dists - finally - would be used by people that have completed
> hardware/bandwidth
> requirements with their existing personal computer - instead of their
> normal Debian/Ubuntu's etc.
> These may be configured for a key-switch full-featured run while computer
> is
> "unused", elastic use of computing power and network power in other cases.
>
> In a few years, i think - computing power would be completely enough
> to run a pretty full-featured software Box in background,
> on every-day basis for Freedom believers, even on netbooks, tablets and
> mobiles.
> Particularly mobiles - that need a GNU/Linux anyway to be normal
> computers, not a closed boxes like they are now
> (i could elaborate widely - why either - Android and iOS aren't a nice
> decisions for FreedomBox goals, not mentioning HP and MS work,
> and why is so important - particularly for FBoxes to encourage a
> GNU/Linux for mobiles, but You, probably, know
> it already).
>
> So - making a dist which not only with Free soft but with pro-active
> Free soft would be useful.
>
>
>
> 2. Another variant is package for an usual GNU/Linux distributives.
> However some things like a speedy Tor requires decisions like in Tails
> so - just a package for existing Ubuntu wouldn't be enough and, given
> the possibly incompatible base-design patterns - FreedomBox Foundation
> should
> discuss with all major Debian-based dists (since the plan as i know -
> to use (exclusively?) - Debian base),
> so - Foundation would see if there a possibility to just make a ppa
> packages for such kind of use,
> encourage some changes (may not be so hard) if not..
>
>
> From what i see - better to use both approaches - for different or
> similar purposes.
>
> I propose - decide on Highly important offers -
> create a Voting system without auth an other and
> promote it everywhere so "mankind could decide"
>
> for me the most important
> Distributed Search stack (it could be great,
> finally - it could be possible!)
> and Distributed hosting (by that
> - distributed back-end for social and
> other soft systems, decoupling data from soft)
>
> that would be included in every possible
> FreedomBox - used with ID system
> (that would possibly need - to be one and best,
> however - it seems not real so - better - few and good)
>
> and give other abilities like - use this or that social network  - for
> a distributives of choice, but authoritately push the Federation,
> ofc. ;)
>
> As  said in many sources - a project need to have a strict position to
> have a face and force.
> so maybe - you - FreedomBox board - would - essentially - decide to
> XMPP or not, for example,
> but it would be much more interesting to create a Voting system where
> IT world if not every user(if
> you won't be able to make a very good poll) - would show their
> position - depending on country etc.
> by that - many things would be much more clear.
>
> PS: Excuse me for bloating the topic but i think - the protocol
> variety decisions are relative to dist and hardware packaging.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>



-- 
Thank you for your time
~Nathan
nathan1465 at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20110710/1d44a387/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list