The question is why is this the case? The simple answer is p2p solutions struggle with asynchronous communications due to variable uptime of consumer devices. That said, that can be overcome by various means.

Establishing a user base for any communications platform is a challenge, largely adoption is driven by user experience and project narrative. There is no reason a p2p project couldn’t meet these criteria, they have before many times for file-sharing.

In fact, I think a self-hosted cloud storage solution with a communications platform built on it could be a great way to get a network of this type established. I know various file-sharing platforms like Soulseek have had these features, but I wonder if you slapped a WhatsApp clone UI onto it and push it as “own and share your files securely, no one you don’t specifically share the file with ever holds the files” if that wouldn’t pick up some steam.

Thunderbolt is a proprietary specification by Intel and Apple, while Displayport is an open standard developed by VESA.

USB connector hardware can meet the Thunderbolt or Displayport specifications, but must conform. Most do not.

Sadly Secure Scuttlebutt Protocol is abandonware, as is it’s more scalable but far less tested successor PZP

The p2p social approach seems so necessary, but projects that actually implement it are fraught with challenges it seems.

Does the BW-16D1HT offer good performance for 4kbluray playback as well as ripping? Looking at it it seems price competitive with the stand-alone players, and if it is good it would make financial sense to buy a dedicated pc and enclosure as an alternative to stand-alone player assuming it can drive HDR and Atmos

looks nice

If I’m reading(skimming) the documentation right, it seems like anyone who can pass the challenge can download the full node and see the full record of interactions. IPFS is not a perfect privacy network, so user accounts can in theory be traced back.

So basically as with Fedi instances it is fully on the Node host to set who can get in based on the challenge, and what is hosted there is their liability. Only difference is Plebbit allows any user to spin up a new instance/community node ad-hoc and they aren’t responsible for maintaining infrastructure beyond what is required seed the nodes they host.

Is that right? I’m not sure but hopefully someone better in the know will correct me if not.

You are vastly underestimating the youths current addiction to social media. Take it away and you will see some rapid pursuit of novelty.

I’m ok with both, but prefer co-ops because the members get direct voting on large decisions by default, rather than a proxy vote via an appointed government worker who answers to the municipal government.

That said, there is no reason these can’t be one and the same, the local government could fund the establishment of a regional co-op and maintain audit and some other limited authority over it.

I also support long-distance fiber infrastructure being built and maintained by worker’s co-ops that would then get paid for service by the regional ISPs. Worker members would be highly motivated to maintain good uptime, and hiring/training members who live local to the fiber lines in remote regions would be possible with the incentive of worker ownership. Once built it is a long term maintenance and security business with steady return, perfect for a worker’s co-op that could be financed with private capital at decent ROI.

ISPs should be regional users cooperatives everywhere. Rural areas in the US have local ISPs structured this way, but corporate ISPs have been trying to use regulation to make them illegal in normal service areas, which is disgusting.

I predict that point to point private fiber (currently used by high speed traders) will become more and more prevalent as issues with AI impersonation and spoofing become more prevalent, we should use this infrastructure drive to push linking co-op and public mesh networks using the same long-run conduit.

Nice! Thanks for posting this. Does it run on all wifi bands? Is there provision for mesh extension by wired Intranet?

Prohibition leads to the propagation of means of evasion. By attempting to ban teenagers from popular means of communications they will incentivize mass adoption of “illicit means” of communications, and create another generation both familiar and comfortable with “illegal online activity” like the Napster generation. Just like Napster, this will also accidentally push youth into online platforms and channels where they are more likely to encounter content not suitable for minors and malware.

The only “truly effective” form that this type of internet control can take is requiring a digital ID verification to establish a connection to the network at the ISP, and that is a nightmare setup we should be prepared to fight tooth and nail.

What are the implications for users of FOSS? Should we not be downloading from github?

Links in the article. Hugging Face and Swiss Telecoms host

a gentleperson and a scholar

Please read the article before commenting.

“The model is named Apertus – Latin for “open” – highlighting its distinctive feature: the entire development process, including its architecture, model weights, and training data and recipes, is openly accessible and fully documented.”

Does Delta Chat / Arcane Chat suffer from the same vulnerability?

https://arcanechat.me/ https://delta.chat/en/

Seems pretty out of date compared to main branch

Looks like the F-Droid link just goes to the main ArcaneChat page. What are the advantages vs ArcaneChat?

Yes, I’m just pointing out that phones aren’t terrible at acting as servers, it’s a generational issue.

I’m definitely going to give this a try when I replace my current phone next year.

usbc solved a lot of the connector issues, so long as you can get a hub to play nice with Linux drivers.