kravietz 🦇 @kravietz@social.privacytools.io

This is... evil 😂

How the Right-Wing Disinformation Loop Helped Kill Virus Research Funding: Matt Gaetz floated a conspiracy theory about a public health initiative on Fox News. The White House defunded it. Then, Trump lashed out at 60 Minutes for reporting the story.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/right-wing-media-trump-kill-coronavirus-research-funding

Wow I watched this as a kid and now it's on Netflix

"300 miles to heaven" (1989)

https://www.netflix.com/watch/81168338?

@feld

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/TorifyHOWTO/BitTorrent

@feld

> what if you registered your name in a global database

You have just invented dynamic DNS and DHT. Still doesn't solve the problem of NAT piercing though.

@feld

> name based networking

P2P peers don't care about names or IP addresses, they just need a stream or datagram connection to the other node. Yes, Tor offers such level of abstraction and it works for services where latency is not critical, which is why the whole Bisq networks runs on Tor and it's great. This however does not work for high-throughput (Bittorrent) or low-latency services (IM, A/V calls) which is precisely why NAT is such a nuisance.

@feld

> so it's harder to setup than IPv4 and NAT

What is harder to set up? There's no set up with SLAAC: my router sends RA with prefix, my devices generate IPv6 within that prefix and in a P2P protocol (IPFS, DAT, Bittorrent, SSB) they just announce that IPv6 to the peer. Next time they connect they announce another IP. It just works, what's "harder" here?

> Well we could

We also could have eternal peace on the planet.

@feld

But do you realize this is completely orthogonal to IPv6 or any other Internet protocol?

If your lawmakers come up with such a *legal* requirement, the operators will need to come with a *technical* solution to implement it. You don't need IPv6 to do that, this association purely a cargo cult.

@feld

And no, his point is not about "an extension exists". His point is that the argument about IPv6 solving all the NAT issues with permanent issues is irrelevant because IPv6 addresses aren't permanent.

Which is also missing the point because it's not about my device having 2a02:390:79ef:0:37d:5e95:3b6d:eaa8 IP forever, it's about having any reachable IP which I can tell to my peer and they can connect to it for the next 15 minutes or so.

@feld

It's definitely not as concerning as you posting about IPv6 being "permanent identifier online". What's next? 5G and Bill Gates conspiracy?

@feld

Have you just posted a rant about "push for IPv6 permanent identifier online" with a video of a guy who explains "IPv6 addresses aren't permanent"? 🙄

@feld

Especially "or something else" 😂

Sorry, with services such as video/audio streaming that spend resources fighting for every millisecond of latency, nobody is switching to Tor unless they absolutely have to.

@feld

I just did and what can you do about it?

Protocols do evolve and its normal. IPv4 has evolved too. Large parts became obsolete, TOS has been replaced by DSCP, fragmentation is barely used today.

@feld

And you don't need because privacy extensions are implemented in client's operating system rather than in a router. The only thing router needs to do is to send router advertisements with its prefix, much simpler than DHCP by the way.

@feld

NAT certainly isn't.

Building P2P apps that work across NAT is complicated as hell and in most cases inefficient because you need a 3rd party to proxy the traffic for you, or a complicated UPnP to open port forwarding for you.

@feld

Yes, because an IPv4 address guarantees your privacy 😂