EFTA00645056.pdf

From: Jeremy Rubin <:. > To: "Jeffrey E." <jeevacation@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 14:02:51 +0000 That seems to fly in the face of net neutrality though. I'm not sure I'm fully in the net-neutral camp, but having guaranteed QoS and low anonymity will prevent people from accessing websites that aren't pre-approved pre-vetted content. OTOH I could see the need for a QoS guaranteed high latency low bandwidth network (with origin) to enable the loT sector to build really interconnected real time products, without really threatening net neutrality. Knowing origin seems good; but this already exists within the intemet to an extent via public key crypto, although perhaps that leaves something to be desired. @Jerem Rubin On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 8:43 AM, jeffrey E. let@i gmail.com> wrote: i agree with danny , just like bitcoin or other digital currencies. I think the land of binary decision . its either this or that, now usually leads to the answer " both" Forwarded message From: Danny Hillis •cl Date: Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 8:33 AM Subject: Re: To: "jeffrey E." <jeevacation@gmail.com> The two properties that the Internet lacks are guaranteed quality of service (bandwidth and latency) and the ability to know for sure where a packet originated. These two features are fundamentally incompatible with the design of the Internet and they trade off against other features. For instance the second network I have in mind may well be inferior to the Internet in efficiency of utilization of the resources , so it will cost more per bit to send a message. It will probably be worse the than the Internet in supporting anonymity. So it it not a replacement for the Internet, but a complement to it. On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 9:58 PM, jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote: Forwarded messa e From: Jeremy Rubin Date: Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 9:51 AM Subject: Re: To: "jeffrey E." <jeevacation@gmail.com> I've been thinking a lot about this the past few days, some of my thoughts below: Generally I'm very positive of the notion; there's a lot to be desired from our intemet protocols. On the other hand, I wonder if this is a variant of trumpism, we need to make the intemet great again. At what point was it great before? When their were but a select few who were able to access it; and everybody on it knew they would be meddled with a bit. Once it went too mainstream no-longer was being a hacker (or even, user) of such systems an at- your-own-risk endeavor, but was something that people depended on. EFTA00645056 Similar modern endeavors include Urbit, linked for posterity https://urbit.org which is mostly made incomprehensible for the point of keeping out the un-enlightened. Urbit is supposed to re-imagine computing as fundamentally distributed. I it would require very close consideration to figure out why a new intemet is actually needed. Traditionally in CS we think of a distributed system as striving to achieve Consistency, Availability, and Partition Tolerance (see Brewers theorem https://www.infoq.com/articleskap-twelve-years-later-how-the-rules-have-chang€A) but unable to get all 3 as they mutually assure each other's impossibility. If we add in a fourth parameter at a second layer of abstraction, let's call it Authenticity, a fifth, Privacy, and a sixth, law enforcement, we cover the gamut of most of what people care about in an Internet system. These second three principles form another triangle similar to CAP, they mutually assure the other's impossibility in some way. I think that thinking in terms of these desirable properties in terms of mutually exclusive groups is probably a useful way to consider the design space. Another well known one is Zooko's triangle: https://en.wikipedia.orgAviki/Zooko%27s triangle. In any case, I've gone on a slight tangent. My point is it's one thing to say you want a new intemet because of a theoretical (or not so theoretical) button, it's another to have motive enough to actually build such a new network. Asides from the button, what properties seem critical to you? @JeremyRubin On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 7:08 AM, jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote: I liked the idea of Internet 2.0 encouraged by the reset switch. please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and EFTA00645057 destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved EFTA00645058