It’s time for a new Internet

Given the recent issues around censorship (“digital platform denial”) I’ve been thinking — what might it take to create a new Internet?

Our basic requirements would start with:

• Privacy and anonymity, first and foremost.
• Ubiquitous, worldwide connectivity.
• Stationary access to the network (from offices, home, etc)
• Mobile access (direct access, without the need for a wireless carrier).
• Acceptable speed (both upload and download).

Buried Cable — Too expensive

The extreme expense of doing all of this via buried cable, parallel to the existing infrastructure would be positively prohibitive.

Tor — a losing game

Tunneling over TCP/IP as with Tor is fine for now, but it’s always a cat-and-mouse game which will eventually be lost (some might argue that it already has been).

Anonymous subscription Internet Tor+OpenVPN+bridges proxy service (paid for via dead-dropped cash deposits, ZCash or what-have-you) seems a bit much, and only creates a honeypot for government spooks to put a Patriot Act gag order on.

In some ways, simply having those kinds of software packages installed on a computer on your network can be painted as incriminating.

Satellites — More privateering

With the rapidly declining cost of launching geostationary Internet satellites into low Earth orbit — 22,000 feet / 6.7KM — some experts predict costs around $2.7Billion to provide Internet access to the entire world.

Of course in today’s geopolitical climate, nobody would just “give” that kind of gift without getting something substantial in return. The fact that in today’s economy, information is more valuable than oil means that even if the global Internet access were 100% free-of-charge it would only be there to exploit the population’s privacy and to strip us of any hope of anonymity.

Hostile Takeovers

If a private Internet is not offered, and the means of producing one is kept from the people, then expect to see take-over attempts, wherein a portion of the servers involved in providing the basic fabric of the Internet are overtaken and forced to provide service as part of a parallel, private Internet.

Since a high level of skill is required to perform such a takeover, persons with such capabilities will be vulnerable to extremists with an agenda, or those with an appetite (and a plan) to use such skills to nefarious ends. Their work will provide them with temporary access to perform whatever tasks required the cover of night, but after a temporary disruption the investigation will begin and the culprit eventually found.

A Global, Democratized, Federated Mesh of Internets

If the people could possibly work together, or delegate such tasks on a local basis — creating a federation of local networks, managed by someone chosen for their expertise and trustworthiness — perhaps it is possible to achieve this.

Something like the local dial-up providers of the early 1990’s, but with wifi or cellular service.

It could be either private — like a gym membership — or public, like paying taxes for the local fire department.

What goes on this new Internet?

This new Internet is not for Netflix and chill, not for Facebook and not for Twitter.

This new Internet is for communicating, organizing, and promoting ideas. Ideas which will get a “no platform” response on the existing Internet infrastructure.

I don’t see this new Internet as a place for sharing pirated movies, videos, photos, pornography, for selling drugs or other illicit material. This new Internet is for the unrestricted right of free speech. Although one might argue that those other things are technically free speech, it’s really a question of respecting ourselves and the tools we have to communicate with one another, and not spoiling things for everyone else. Folks who want to engage in darknet activity can go someplace else.

Security — When things go wrong

Since free speech currently requires anonymity, there should be no way to track who is doing what within the network.

Of course, this of course opens the network to attack, misuse and abuse.

An appeal to respect it, leave it alone in the name of neutrality — in much the same way as Switzerland is simply neutral — could potentially help.

By making it unpopular to attack, misuse or abuse this neutral network we only appeal to the justice within the people. For those without justice inside, the network must be defended.

Let’s cross that bridge when we come to it

Well, if nobody is using the system then it’s no problem. If the neutral network is actually successful, does what it is intended for and helps those who need it, then wonderful.

I suspect it will need to be defended against outside threats much more than it will require policing of its own user base.