Last week I was delighted to be invited to the British Computer Society "OpenSource Specialist Group", where I presented: "Why & How you should start using Onion Networking"
Now available for viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pebRZyg_bh8 (caution: it starts a bit loud, check your volume)
There are a few nits in it where I misspoke or wasn't entirely sure — some stuff I need to read-up on, plus it turns out that thinking on your feet is hard — but I think it's mostly okay.
- alec
On 7/22/19, Alec Muffett alec.muffett@gmail.com wrote:
"Why & How you should start using Onion Networking" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pebRZyg_bh8
A fine introduction.
Yet how do people, including those involved with or using other projects in the space, compare contrast and evaluate this with "Why and how start using" and writing for... Onion, I2P, CJDNS, MaidSafe, IPFS and all the other overlay networks out there and forthcoming, all in their respective "non-exit" modes?
Whether it be for protocol layer capabilities HTTPS/TCP/UDP/IPv6, or to achieve application layer... messaging, storage, web-ish, etc.
And how does each's lack or presence of whatever API interfaces, UDP, broadcast, name layers, or other potential transport and programming models, lend themselves to app development and widespread eventual adoption and use?
And how, without offering IPv6 or the ultimately better all encompassingly wide and modular, even cryptographic, AF_OVERLAY interface that all networks could plug into, does anyone expect to get everything interoperable and working together?
[Note that comparing "traction" re all other nets accessing facebook is false since those nets simply do not offer a simple exit mode to do so as tor does. What would be fair is if facebook had CJDNS, I2P, Onion, etc interfaces, and then comparing those access stats, scaled relative to each respective project estimates of number of users, project advertising funding impact, project *Browser availability, etc.]
tor-onions@lists.torproject.org
-
Alec Muffett -
grarpamp