What Does the 'Next Internet' Look Like? 283
Kraisch writes with a link to the Guardian website, which again revisits the subject of reconstructing the internet. This time the question isn't whether it should be done, but what should the goals of a redesign be? From the article: "'There's a real need to have better identity management, to declare your age and to know that when you're talking to, say, Barclays bank, that you're really doing so,' said Jonathan Zittrain, professor of internet governance and regulation at the Oxford Internet Institute. At the moment we are still using very clumsy methods to approach such problems. The result: last year alone, identity theft and online fraud cost British victims an estimated £414m, while one recent report claimed 93% of all email sent from the UK was spam ... Many ideas revolve around so-called "mesh networks", which link many computers to create more powerful, reliable connections to the internet. By using small meshes of many machines that share a pipeline to the net instead of relying on lots of parallel connections, experts say they can create a system that is more intelligent and less prone to attack."
It looks like (Score:4, Interesting)
Anonymous cowards? (Score:1, Interesting)
How does that jive with anonymous cowards wanting to keep thier identity hidden?
There is no next. (Score:2, Interesting)
The "new internet" (Score:5, Interesting)
* No more anonymity. You'll need to identify yourself just to get onto the network, and protections will be in place to keep you from hiding behind a proxy. Your computer's unique ID will be registered in your name, and it will be available to the FBI, CIA, and RIAA upon request (no warrant required).
* Large barrier to entry. No more setting up your own server without getting special permission to act as a server. There will be a barrier between servers and clients, and consumers will be second-class citizens in this regard.
* Probably less spam. Tighter controls will make it harder for spammers to get their unwanted traffic into the intertubes. Also, now that it's possible to implement an email tax, email spam could be made prohibitively expensive.
* Better security. Locking the internet down will help somewhat in keeping the criminal element out, because it will (theoretically) be a lot easier to trace where they're coming from.
So, you win some, you lose some. There's a use for this kind of network, but only for secure transactions. I don't think a "new internet" is something that anyone here would want to use.
Privacy concerns (Score:4, Interesting)
I view this much in the same way as why a presidential election is kept as a secret ballot. Much of the information about browsing history and activities can reflect both positively and negatively on your own personal views which one should have the ability to keep private if they wish. In this way we can choose our religious, moral and personal views much more freely and need not tolerate unwarranted persecution.
I just hope this idea isn't being considered too seriously.
encrypted, decentralized p2p network (Score:4, Interesting)
Now instead of just email, change this to any kind of data. Create your own username with a private key, and you can use it to get access to data directed to you on any machine connected to the PKI network.
Want anonymity? Just create another identity.
Yes (Score:2, Interesting)
Good enough idea, but internet[0] can already do this.
Proceed to shitlist everyone that you've yet to arrange a keyswap with, and enjoy fully encrypted communication.(--If both parties agree that a bond via electronic communication is 'important enough,' you'll soon see your f[r]iends converted to encryption in an eyeblink..)
Should you wish to 'invite' more people once they turn responsible, you're free to do so.
(Effectivity by using lowest acceptable sanity-denominator.)
It looks like this one: (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll take the spam.
The "Problem" Is Open Endedness (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:encrypted, decentralized p2p network (Score:3, Interesting)