[StrLght]

> We need robust, decentralized mesh networks that bypass state-controlled gateways entirely.

Let's do a thought experiment: assume they're here and that we are talking about a dictatorship. What's next?

If it's something like Meshtastic — it requires standalone hardware. These devices will be outlawed. The entire country will stop importing them, confiscating these devices from whoever uses them, probably jailing people who own them.

Alright, then what if it's something like BitChat instead — you only need your phone. If it gets traction, police will stop you and force you to unlock your phone. They do this already in Russia.

It's not a technical problem and can't be solved like one.

[jauntywundrkind]

A million years ago when I was in highschool, teachers would make us show them that we cleared our TI-83 calculators.

So there were of course various programs to simulate the experience of clearing the calculator. Plenty of ways through the police stop with our illicit digital goods, even then.

Generally just don't come here anymore, but with the US fascists now checking phones at borders, the idea of having low detectability digital "smuggling compartments" (digitally speaking) in our devices is becoming all too real. Some loopback filesystem that your phone can mount that has the rest of the phone, various systemd-sysext layers for bitchat.

With the UK joining the idiot races to maybe ban VPNs, we have another not so far off reason for needing protection versus the totalitarian. Sorry but if you believe tailscaling home is a crime you're the enemy of society, your rules are a joke, and declaration of Independence of cyberspace strongly is in detail about what a mockery of yourself you are making.

[StrLght]

> A million years ago when I was in highschool, teachers would make us show them that we cleared our TI-83 calculators.

Comparing high school to a dictatorship is one way to confirm that you have very little experience with the latter. You do understand that if something is causing issues to the regime, then regime will simply make it illegal? Illegal to use, to posses, to buy, etc. — not like specifics matter here.

> Generally just don't come here anymore, but with the US fascists now checking phones at borders, the idea of having low detectability digital "smuggling compartments" (digitally speaking) in our devices is becoming all too real. Some loopback filesystem that your phone can mount that has the rest of the phone, various systemd-sysext layers for bitchat.

Even then, that's just wishful thinking. Only GrapheneOS has something similar right now, duress PIN/password (which isn't exactly designed for cases like this, but still) [0]. It won't help you much in a dictatorship, the police isn't that dumb — you'll be subjecting yourself to physical harm by using it. They know that your phone isn't empty, and they don't need anything to prove it. For them gut feeling is enough, laws and human rights are irrelevant.

Also, let's be realistic, Apple isn't going to have something like that on iOS.

[0]: https://grapheneos.org/features#duress

[jauntywundrkind]

> You do understand that if something is causing issues to the regime, then regime will simply make it illegal?

The teachers made having a calculator with stuff loaded on it illegal. IP piracy is illegal. Streaming sports is illegal. There's all manners of illegal activity we do. I don't see how my story wasn't clear to you: legality isn't self-enforcing, and it isn't the world's job to bow down to information control demands from governments.

I'm not surprised but I am disappointed seeing two comments that have the most unhackerly spirit. Assuming we should try and do nothing, assuming the government has vast infinite overwhelming technical power, to the degree where it's not even worth trying anything or securing ourselves and our freedom of speech. Assuming technical works will make no difference. I don't think tech has control, is the end all be all here. But I think tech should be showing up to attempt the right thing, attempt to help people deal with fascist totalitarian movements trying to clamp down on the people of this world is something tech ought to do.

> Even then, that's just wishful thinking.

Well, to some degrees, I think it depends on us and our attitudes. And whether we just accept our lot/accept domination from above or not. With the increasingly scary situation at the US and in places like Iran, I think maybe perhaps more people might be interested in doing some civic good against thought control, hopefully.

[4ggr0]

if you get caught in high-school fake-clearing your TI, you may get a failed grade for this specific exam and/or detention.

if you get caught doing an illegal activity in an authoritarian dictatorship, you face fines and/or prison time or death.

of course we can compare these situations to use them as light analogies, but i think that's about where the comparison ends. or in other words, of course you can 1:1 compare situations if you completely dismiss the potential consequences.

having the spirit to free yourself from fascism is needed, but you may get shot while trying to flee to safety or while being pinned to the ground, defenseless.

[jauntywundrkind]

The more the world can do to normalize good personal security & privacy, the harder it is going to be for regimes.

Iran has had to turn off the internet for good to maintain their vicious violent theocratic totalitarianism. They had to basically give up technology, pull the plug. Sure that demonstrates them "winning", them having control, but also, they couldn't monitor everyone, they couldn't control technology, and their nation will be immensely poorer and worse generally, in remarkably huge ways, because they lost so hard & had no choice.

The declaration of Independence of cyberspace was over the top & ridiculous, but it's right. These states have extremely limited power, and are smaller, much smaller, than the noosphere that surrounds them. With extreme injury states can secluded themselves, like a North Korea, to maintain control. But humankind comes from man the tool maker, homo erectus, and that has been and will keep being our better side. Giving the bastards up above hell, building liberatory, private systems isn't nearly as pointless and hopeless and useless as your 100% all negative don't even try view would indicate, we do have power, especially if we work broadly to improve the general footing, rather than building just exceptional war-time tooling.

[tavavex]

> Sorry but if you believe tailscaling home is a crime you're the enemy of society, your rules are a joke

Are you replying to the wrong comment? The person above said nothing about how good or bad privacy measures are. What they're saying that totalitarianism is a problem of governance, not technology. In a totalitarian world, when some new technological way to bypass oversight is conceived, the government or other powerful entities will always have the means to shut it all down, they just need to care enough. If people start using VPNs en masse, they'll start mandatory computer searches, develop increasingly sophisticated tracing and detecting tech, or as a last resort shut it all down by targeting the underlying infrastructure - you know, like Iran. If enough people start carrying devices with hidden filesystems, then they'll start equipping police, border guards etc. with devices that plug into phones and detect these hidden compartments, armed with mandatory manufacturer backdoors and all zero-days they'll ever need. The point is that crackdowns are inevitable, unless your movement aims at staying nearly irrelevant to the regime. They always have the means to win. Changing it requires a restructuring of society, not an increasingly elaborate and lopsided cat-and-mouse game.

> declaration of Independence of cyberspace

Please tell me you're joking.