Reachable IPv4 addresses? Traffic volume? Client side HTTP/TLS requests? DNS queries?
Do they take whatever data they get, aggregate everything into one giant field called "connectivity", and evaluate the stability of a connection based on that success rate?
We don't know.
If there are still those who do not use the cloud, it is because the big three have taken advantage of their position a lot.
The pricing of Hetzner, CloudFlare, Linode, OVH, ... seems to be cheaper and more transparent.
If you don't use special tools not available elsewhere, such as AWS' SageMaker, or Google's TPUs, ...., then it's probably not economically interesting to use the Amazon, Microsoft or Google clouds.
The specification naively says that the data is saved in interoperable formats. Sure, you can store your data in an interoperable data formats, suppose it is JSON, but it is of little use if the various applications do not know how to interpret and manage correctly the information contained therein.
It's been a while, have the applications improved?
I don't think we'll be able to avoid that hurdle; we'll need to make sure that the protocol is really simple.
But having to know the data format of the app itself is to be expected. If an app "instagram-on-solid" stores data in a certain way, the alternate app will need to understand those schemas as well to be compatible. That's how interop has always worked, even in the pre-internet age when we were exchanging files on disk.
> It's been a while, have the applications improved?
I haven't looked at apps in a while - but that was indeed moving very slowly.
> Experiment with routing technology
> Participating in dn42 is primarily useful for learning routing technologies such as BGP, using a reasonably large network (> 1500 AS, > 1700 prefixes).
> Since dn42 is very similar to the Internet, it can be used as a hands-on testing ground for new ideas, or simply to learn real networking stuff that you probably can't do on the Internet (BGP multihoming, transit). The biggest advantage when compared to the Internet: if you break something in the network, you won't have any big network operator yelling angrily at you.
Assuming an increase in the adoption of the technology, users will still mainly use OTT services.
WhatsApp Business is a saint in comparison to the Wild West of telcos.
The presence of telomerase prevents telomere shortening in cancer cells and gives the ability to divide an unlimited number of times in a laboratory cell culture plate.
But the aging process is not reversed, so a multicellular complex organism would eventually die.
In this case the risk of contagion of the whole sector is not negligible..
If they are flooding the real estate market with properties, the value of a building decreases for everyone.
If you believe that, I have a bridge in Xiangcheng to give you.
Your posts can be traced back to you, your feed is chronological and moderation is back in your hands.
Propaganda is a HUGE issue, and I’m sure anyone won’t be able to spot every case of misinformation.
But everything could be back in your hands. Nobody can _FORCE_ content on you, you are in control of your own experience.
I wish that too. And I even upvoted you for that.
Unfortunately, there are significant hurdles/barriers to entry for most folks.
First among those are asymmetric internet links. It's great that I can stream HD video while pulling down well-seeded torrents, while I apply updates to a dozen VMs without an issue.
But I can't support (and I don't have the static IPs) more than a few connections to my systems.
That's an important, and often overlooked, driver towards greater centralization.
My current plan gives me (based on speed test data) ~225Mb/s download and ~12Mb/s upload.
Obviously (multi)Gb/sec symmetric connections would be ideal, as well as easily supported by FTTP.
If enough folks have those, there's no shortage of federated, self-hosted alternatives out there -- as you helpfully pointed out.
An easily installed, self-hosted platform, combined with the requisite consumer bandwidth could certainly provide enough leverage to move folks off Facebook, et al.
Sadly, I won't hold my breath.
Is it as easy to get an FB like functionality with a click of a button? If not, that isn't going to work. Average Joe Schmoe isn't going to just self-host an instance, even if he knew how to do so. Also, if there is a competing service to Facebook, it better have everything that Facebook offers, except for the recommended and sponsored content. That includes most importantly being able to connect with old friends, acquaintances and contacts seamlessly. Does Mastodon allow for all that with just a click of a button?
If not, then programmers should just stop whining about how they wish people were more like them and instead actually build something that can be used by Joe Schmoe.
I've tried various Mastodon clients before. I couldn't figure much out of how to use them in 5 minutes and the UI was crap so I just ditched them. Even if it were a good experience, the fact that I have to go through hoops to set up an instance, then get all my friends from Facebook or Whatsapp or whatever to join me in using it, is enough deterrent that makes me not bother with it (and no, we don't use Facebook either). One app that seems to be getting this concept right, but not fully there yet, is Telegram.
"Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection" was published in 1998 [https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a391565.pdf]. We should know that DPI is not reliable.
In fact Geneva is a research project that expands and extends the concepts of fragrouting, applying a genetic algorithm to automatically find flaws in censoring middleboxes [https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Kkevsterrr/geneva/master/e...].
It is expected that a research project of this type exposes these kind of bugs. And the reason why they can research these things is because "there isn't enough information on the wire".
Bugs of this type are egregious for their danger and simplicity, but patched these there will always be.
Information theory proves there's an infinite number of ways in which you can codify something. The subset of encodings that meets the rules imposed by any middlebox is in turn infinite.
> they aren’t perfect and are only effective against certain behavior
This means that they are only effective against default behavior.
Anything else is out of scope for these products, which I think is what @laumars was referring to with "outside the bounds of normal expected operation".
Marketing sophisms can be fun, but defining something as a "security product" when it is mathematically proven that there are infinite ways to bypass the provided "security guarantees" is ... simply something I refuse to do.
Reason why I've been uninstalling the agent on each Azure VM since 5 years: you can't make mistakes in code you don't have, at the cost of losing integration with the dashboard.