Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-06-14 Thread Jonathan Wilkes 
With the way most residential routers are set up, and the way in which most
privacy-preserving software leaves the ugly details of traversing a NAT to
the user, I can think of only a few ways I would benefit from
having a freedombox.  That is-- I can't think of a single instance where routing
around the most common ISP obstacles (like not wanting me to run a globally-
reachable service from my home, throttling, etc.) would be made easier by
introducing another piece of hardware into the mix.
However, I would still like to use the Freedombox for three inter-related 
purposes. 

In order of immediate importance for potential users, they are:
1) As a foolproof, turn-key solution for low risk, private browsing and data 
retention.
2) As an introduction to f2f identities, and chat that is end-to-end encrypted.
3) As a physical metaphor for seriousness about control over one's data.

#1 is the most important because it is the only use case for which the
Freedombox offers a unique solution that _doesn't_ depend on potential
users understanding the dangers of online surveillance vis a vis Google,
Facebook, and others.  Even those who are perfectly happy expressing
a large part of their social lives on Facebook have a need/desire for privacy
in _some_ domain.  For one who lacks any knowledge whatsoever of privacy
issues, this domain is probably pornography.  With limited knowledge it is
pornography and career-sensitive data.  And so on up the ladder until we
arrive at complex technical and philosophical issues of privacy and data
control for which members of this list are quite familiar.
Basically I'm talking about Freedombox as a machine on which the user runs
Vidalia or the Tor Browser Bundle (not exactly sure how that would work), plus
some encrypted storage.  As far as I know, these are the only pieces of
peer-reviewed, actively maintained software for which the user can simply click
an icon and have the privacy-preserving service "just work".  The benefit of
running it on a separate piece of hardware is small, but the benefit exists 
(ease
of mind knowing that any data stored from private browsing or anything else
is encrypted, without having to follow an online tutorial).  More importantly, 
that
benefit exists and is meaningful to the user whether the data itself is 
frivolous or
potentially life-altering.

#2 is secondary because there really isn't a benefit to the user who has no
understanding of the importance of online privacy.  It's also questionable 
whether
this is even important to users with an above-average understanding of privacy
issues.  I see an enormous amount of data shared _publicly_ on Diaspora by
people who left Facebook ostensibly because of its privacy issues, for example.
It's not clear to me that such users would understand the importance of
developing a bottom-up system of peer-to-peer trust themselves, rather than
just having their data housed unencrypted on a server and making it available to
the public.

There is the future benefit of being able to backup data with your friends' 
Freedomboxes. 
But that presupposes a critical mass of online activity happening through the 
Freedbombox
rather than the current centralized services being used.
#3 Is probably most important as an explanatory technique.  Here's a block of 
hardware. 
This is your data vault.  Get seven of your friends to run one and you've got 
an encrypted
backup.  Put it where it's safe, and that's where it stays.  (I think this is 
how Eben Moglen
originally described it.)

Anyway, as I see it this is the only set of uses that doesn't exclude 99% of 
the population
from actually wanting to buy a box, plug it in, and get to work on it.  
Everything else is great
_if_ one already understands about privacy and freedom; unfortunately, most 
people do not, and
I'd rather they find out through software updates that add a feature to the box 
they are
already using for _some_purpose, or by a friend programming it to route around 
the govt's filters,
than by yet more of their data getting leaked, or picked through for potential 
profit, or harassment.

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-31 Thread Michael Rauch 

On 05/31/2012 02:44 AM, Nat Tuck wrote:

In my mind, the key piece of functionality for a freedombox would be as
my authoritative address book. From there, email, jabber, SIP,
status.net , diaspora, etc, are just obvious
extensions. This is really the key, because whoever owns your address
book owns everything that uses it automatically.


+1 for the address book

i would also like my fbx to host my profile containing my own address 
data, then give permissions to my friends to access this profile. this 
would allow my friends fbx to sync their address book with updates i 
make to my profile automatically.


-michael




___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-30 Thread Nat Tuck 
In my mind, the key piece of functionality for a freedombox would be as my
authoritative address book. From there, email, jabber, SIP, status.net,
diaspora, etc, are just obvious extensions. This is really the key, because
whoever owns your address book owns everything that uses it automatically.

Other multi-device-sync and web services like a password manager and
dropbox thing would be nice, but they're significantly less important
because they don't have the network effect power of the address book
dependent stuff. In fact, if Google has everyone's address book, having a
dropbox clone on your freedom box doesn't really matter - network effect
will force you to Google Drive.

-- Nat

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Nick M. Daly  wrote:

> So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might end up chasing
> ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...") instead of actual,
> deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd like to hear from
> folks what you'd actually like to use the system for.  If enough people
> get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it a priority for
> the next hackfest.
>
> I want to use it as:
>
> - A Jabber Server.
>
> - A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).
>
> - A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
>  down somewhere).
>
> Anybody else?
>
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-28 Thread Jonas Smedegaard 
On 12-05-27 at 11:54pm, Bjarni Rúnar Einarsson wrote:
> A minor clarification... :-)
> 
> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Jonathan Wilkes  
> wrote:
> > The approaches I can think of are:
> > a) pagekite et al, which would then become a central point of 
> >attack/failure
> 
> Yes and no. PageKite's "central point of failure" is by design the 
> exact same central point as that of the web itself: the DNS system.
> 
> PageKite assumes that there are many different front-end relay servers 
> available, and connections can move from one to another at any time. 
> So if one relay is taken down, the website is simply routed to another 
> one and DNS gets updated.  This works today.

If such rerouting happens automatic and decentralized, I agree that 
there is no single point of failure.

But if a website owner needs to explicitly pick a different pagekite 
tunneling provider if the previous one stops working, then I agree with 
Jonathan that pagekite becomes a central point of attack/failure.

So how do rerouting happen?  How is it assured that rerouting mechanisms 
cannot be abused for hijacking?


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-27 Thread Jonathan Wilkes 
- Original Message -

> From: Bjarni Rúnar Einarsson 
> To: Jonathan Wilkes 
> Cc: Jay Sulzberger ; 
> "freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org" 
> 
> Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2012 7:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?
> 
> A minor clarification... :-)
> 
> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Jonathan Wilkes  
> wrote:
>>  The approaches I can think of are:
>>  a) pagekite et al, which would then become a central point of 
> attack/failure
> 
> Yes and no. PageKite's "central point of failure" is by design the
> exact same central point as that of the web itself: the DNS system.
> 
> PageKite assumes that there are many different front-end relay servers
> available, and connections can move from one to another at any time.
> So if one relay is taken down, the website is simply routed to another
> one and DNS gets updated.  This works today.
> 
> Of course, the PageKite service which my company provides is indeed a
> "central point of attack/failure", but as the solution is open source,
> you don't need to rely on it unless you want to.
> Obviously as we grow
> we hope to become more resilient and robust and remain "the best way
> to use PageKite", but we're certainly not the *only* way.

How resilient would the rest of the relays be if your service happened to get 
taken down?

> 
> One other option, is the possibility for the community to
> collaboratively share resources and provide relay service whenever a
> FreedomBox detects that it is lucky enough to have a public,
> unfiltered IP address.  The reason the project didn't go down that
> road from the very start, was due to security: as PageKite carries a
> fair bit of legacy plain-text HTTP traffic, a volunteer-based relay
> network would be a tempting target for abuse because relays could
> rewrite web pages on the fly to inject malware.
> 
> However, if people only tunnel end-to-end SSL encrypted HTTPS traffic
> (which is arguably the only reasonable strategy for the FreedomBox use
> cases anyway) then it would actually be perfectly safe to accept relay
> service from untrusted strangers. :-)

That could be a workable solution, but would require the 
tech-whiz(zes) in one's group of friends to also have a decent high-speed 
internet connection to provide everyone with reliable enough service.  
(Maybe Ripple would come in handy here.)

-Jonathan

> 
> Censorship via. the DNS network is really the only major stumbling
> block, but it affects many other services as well, not just PageKite.
> 
> -- 
> Bjarni R. Einarsson
> Founder, lead developer of PageKite.
> 
> Make localhost servers visible to the world: https://pagekite.net/
> 

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-27 Thread Bjarni Rúnar Einarsson 
A minor clarification... :-)

On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Jonathan Wilkes  wrote:
> The approaches I can think of are:
> a) pagekite et al, which would then become a central point of attack/failure

Yes and no. PageKite's "central point of failure" is by design the
exact same central point as that of the web itself: the DNS system.

PageKite assumes that there are many different front-end relay servers
available, and connections can move from one to another at any time.
So if one relay is taken down, the website is simply routed to another
one and DNS gets updated.  This works today.

Of course, the PageKite service which my company provides is indeed a
"central point of attack/failure", but as the solution is open source,
you don't need to rely on it unless you want to. Obviously as we grow
we hope to become more resilient and robust and remain "the best way
to use PageKite", but we're certainly not the *only* way.

One other option, is the possibility for the community to
collaboratively share resources and provide relay service whenever a
FreedomBox detects that it is lucky enough to have a public,
unfiltered IP address.  The reason the project didn't go down that
road from the very start, was due to security: as PageKite carries a
fair bit of legacy plain-text HTTP traffic, a volunteer-based relay
network would be a tempting target for abuse because relays could
rewrite web pages on the fly to inject malware.

However, if people only tunnel end-to-end SSL encrypted HTTPS traffic
(which is arguably the only reasonable strategy for the FreedomBox use
cases anyway) then it would actually be perfectly safe to accept relay
service from untrusted strangers. :-)

Censorship via. the DNS network is really the only major stumbling
block, but it affects many other services as well, not just PageKite.

-- 
Bjarni R. Einarsson
Founder, lead developer of PageKite.

Make localhost servers visible to the world: https://pagekite.net/

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-27 Thread Jonas Smedegaard 
On 12-05-27 at 08:22am, P S wrote:
> On May 27, 2012, at 1:21, Jonathan Wilkes  wrote:
> 
> >> So let us standardize hardware and protocols for Proper Net 
> >> Connection.
> > 
> > I am very much in favor of that journey.  But knowing that the 
> > Freedombox is really about taking currently existing software and 
> > having it interoperate underneath a good user-interface, and after 
> > having seen the current tools out there for privacy-preservation, 
> > you will understand if I am very guarded about what the Freedombox 
> > can offer non-expert users sitting behind a very user-unfriendly 
> > wireless router & dsl modem.
> 
> Can Freedombox-usable UI/feature improvements be upstreamed to DD-WRT 
> or OpenWRT?


FreedomBox use Debian. Debian is not downstream to DD-WRT or OpenWRT: 
They are all distributions, so more like parallel branches of the 
"streams" of FLOSS development.


It is all Free software, so reuse is both permitted and encouraged. And 
the mentioned systems are all POSIX so it is technically possible. 
Whether or not reuse is sensible is another matter: As an example, if 
FreedomBox makes a UI for filtering, choosing and installing Debian 
packages, that will most likely be tied closely to Debian-specific 
mechanisms like debconf and debtags, so is unlikely to appear in DD-WRT 
or OpenWRT.

You may wanna look at http://www.debwrt.net/ if you want the most reuse 
of Debian inventions on *WRT style systems.


Regards,

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-27 Thread P S 
On May 27, 2012, at 1:21, Jonathan Wilkes  wrote:

>> So let us standardize hardware and protocols for Proper Net
>> Connection.
> 
> I am very much in favor of that journey.  But knowing that the Freedombox 
> is really about taking currently existing software and having it interoperate 
> underneath a good user-interface, and after having seen the current 
> tools out there for privacy-preservation, you will understand if I am 
> very guarded about what the Freedombox can offer non-expert users 
> sitting behind a very user-unfriendly wireless router & dsl modem.

Can Freedombox-usable UI/feature improvements be upstreamed to DD-WRT or 
OpenWRT?

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-26 Thread Jonathan Wilkes 




- Original Message -
> From: Jay Sulzberger 
> To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2012 8:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 26 May 2012, Jonathan Wilkes  wrote:
> 
>>  - Original Message -
> 
>>  From: Jay Sulzberger 
>>  To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
>>  Cc: Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:50 PM
>>  Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox 
> for?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  On Fri, 25 May 2012, Joshua Spodek  wrote:
>> 
>>>   Thanks for asking. I find it interesting to see everyone's 
> different
>>>   goals. I think my needs overlap with typical non-geek users wanting to
>>>   avoid faceless corporations owning my private data.
>>> 
>>>   * Diaspora
>>>   * Skype replacement
>>>   * Host my own email, blog, photographs
>>>   * Seamless backups to friends' Freedomboxes
>> 
>>  Suppose we have two people in front of home computers connected
>>  to the Net via Time Warner Cable in Manhattan.  We assume further
>>  that the two people are in their own houses, and that they own
>>  their computers, ordinary sense of "own a computer".
>> 
>>  If the two people are Unix sysadmins, then they can arrange to
>>  easily move files from one box to the other.  Say they have set
>>  up a system so that with the push of one button, and the
>>  indication of a file on their computer, the file gets sent to the
>>  other computer.  Such an arrangement would serve, I claim, as a
>>  foundation for what we want.
>> 
>>  I think today the main obstacle for non-Unix-sysadmins to running
>>  such a file transfer utility is setting up the "home router",
>>  that is, the router behind the Time Warner "cable modem".  If
>>  there were no router in the way, then it is not hard to set up a
>>  system which could be used by two non-Unix-Sysadmins.  (Not hard
>>  as long as we have some method for getting the Grand Net facing
>>  address of one box to the other.  And if we allow dependence on a
>>  third party then whatismyip.com serves; if we wish to avoid third
>>  party dependence at this level, likely we will have to set
>>  something up on the router; and there are other methods too.)
>> 
>>  The home router is today usually:
>> 
>>  1. a box separate from the home computer
>> 
>>  2. with a difficult to understand method of programming, that is,
>>  the ridiculous "web based" fill in the incomprehensible form,
>> 
>>  3. which form is non-standard
>> 
>>  These three things are, I think, mainly what makes direct
>>  connection over the Net so hard for most people.  Thus we must
>>  repair these deficiencies:
>> 
>>  1. whether the box is grossly physically separate from the home
>>  computer, its setting up to allow direct comunication with the
>>  other box cannot require more than putting the name of the owner
>>  of the other box; likely we should have the router be contained
>>  in a joint "home computer router" thingie
> 
> Just to make sure we're both talking about the same problem-- the main 
> problem in #1 is that for Bob's Freedombox to talk to Alice's 
> Freedombox, Bob must traverse the stock wifi router/dsl modem by poking a 
> hole 
> using port forwarding or some other mechanism to allowing two-way 
> communication 
> between the Freedomboxes.  (I'm assuming here that either Alice doesn't 
> have a NAT traversal to worry about or has already magically dealt with it.)
> 
> There's no workable "one-click" way to do this as I see it-- some 
> routers are open wifi routers, some are not, some are password protected-- 
> and 
> of those that are password protected, some have a default hardware password, 
> some have a default provider password, some have a custom one hidden from the 
> person paying for the account,
> and some have a backdoor to allow the network owner to push "updates" 
> to the router.  Furthermore some
> ISPs allow custom changes through the router's web-interface, some have a 
> TOS that disallow but are practically lazy about it, some will throttle you, 
> some will "repair" the problem, and probably all would become 
> aggressive if there were a large increase in home users
> setting up their router for an always-on, multi-service, internationally 
> reachable server.
> 
> I hope I'm wrong about th

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-26 Thread Jay Sulzberger 



On Sat, 26 May 2012, Jonathan Wilkes  wrote:


- Original Message -



From: Jay Sulzberger 
To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
Cc: 
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:50 PM

Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?



On Fri, 25 May 2012, Joshua Spodek  wrote:


 Thanks for asking. I find it interesting to see everyone's different
 goals. I think my needs overlap with typical non-geek users wanting to
 avoid faceless corporations owning my private data.

 * Diaspora
 * Skype replacement
 * Host my own email, blog, photographs
 * Seamless backups to friends' Freedomboxes


Suppose we have two people in front of home computers connected
to the Net via Time Warner Cable in Manhattan.? We assume further
that the two people are in their own houses, and that they own
their computers, ordinary sense of "own a computer".

If the two people are Unix sysadmins, then they can arrange to
easily move files from one box to the other.? Say they have set
up a system so that with the push of one button, and the
indication of a file on their computer, the file gets sent to the
other computer.? Such an arrangement would serve, I claim, as a
foundation for what we want.

I think today the main obstacle for non-Unix-sysadmins to running
such a file transfer utility is setting up the "home router",
that is, the router behind the Time Warner "cable modem".? If
there were no router in the way, then it is not hard to set up a
system which could be used by two non-Unix-Sysadmins.? (Not hard
as long as we have some method for getting the Grand Net facing
address of one box to the other.? And if we allow dependence on a
third party then whatismyip.com serves; if we wish to avoid third
party dependence at this level, likely we will have to set
something up on the router; and there are other methods too.)

The home router is today usually:

1. a box separate from the home computer

2. with a difficult to understand method of programming, that is,
the ridiculous "web based" fill in the incomprehensible form,

3. which form is non-standard

These three things are, I think, mainly what makes direct
connection over the Net so hard for most people.? Thus we must
repair these deficiencies:

1. whether the box is grossly physically separate from the home
computer, its setting up to allow direct comunication with the
other box cannot require more than putting the name of the owner
of the other box; likely we should have the router be contained
in a joint "home computer router" thingie


Just to make sure we're both talking about the same problem-- the 
main problem in #1 is that for Bob's Freedombox to talk to Alice's 
Freedombox, Bob must traverse the stock wifi router/dsl modem by 
poking a hole using port forwarding or some other mechanism to 
allowing two-way communication between the Freedomboxes.? 
(I'm assuming here that either Alice doesn't have a NAT traversal to 
worry about or has already magically dealt with it.)


There's no workable "one-click" way to do this as I see it-- some 
routers are open wifi routers, some are not, some are password 
protected-- and of those that are password protected, some have 
a default hardware password, some have a default provider password, 
some have a custom one hidden from the person paying for the account,
and some have a backdoor to allow the 
network owner to push "updates" to the router.? Furthermore some
ISPs allow custom changes through the router's web-interface, some 
have a TOS that disallow but are practically lazy about it, some 
will throttle you, some will "repair" the problem, and probably all would 
become aggressive if there were a large increase in home users
setting up their router for an always-on, multi-service, internationally 
reachable server.


I hope I'm wrong about the difficulty of a one-click solution, but if you 
look at the burgeoning privacy-aware network overlays out there right 
now and realize that those protocols would grow exponentially if any 
of them were to implement a one-click solution, it becomes obvious that 
this isn't a problem that the Freedombox can fix.? (In fact throwing 
hardware at the problem would make it more difficult, as a cross-platform 
software solution would be much cheaper.)


The approaches I can think of are:
a) pagekite et al, which would then become a central point of attack/failure
b) supernodes, which run the danger of de facto centralization (like Diaspora's 
main pod) because there hasn't been enough privacy education for the 
common user to be able to gauge the difference in risk level between entrusting 
data to a close geeky friend vs. a stranger with a less-than-evil TOS.


-Jonathan

Thanks, Jonathan, for reading and responding.

I will, as soon as I have one full day free, attempt an answer.

In my first post in response,

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-26 Thread Jonathan Wilkes 
- Original Message -

> From: Jay Sulzberger 
> To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 25 May 2012, Joshua Spodek  wrote:
> 
>>  Thanks for asking. I find it interesting to see everyone's different
>>  goals. I think my needs overlap with typical non-geek users wanting to
>>  avoid faceless corporations owning my private data.
>> 
>>  * Diaspora
>>  * Skype replacement
>>  * Host my own email, blog, photographs
>>  * Seamless backups to friends' Freedomboxes
> 
> Suppose we have two people in front of home computers connected
> to the Net via Time Warner Cable in Manhattan.  We assume further
> that the two people are in their own houses, and that they own
> their computers, ordinary sense of "own a computer".
> 
> If the two people are Unix sysadmins, then they can arrange to
> easily move files from one box to the other.  Say they have set
> up a system so that with the push of one button, and the
> indication of a file on their computer, the file gets sent to the
> other computer.  Such an arrangement would serve, I claim, as a
> foundation for what we want.
> 
> I think today the main obstacle for non-Unix-sysadmins to running
> such a file transfer utility is setting up the "home router",
> that is, the router behind the Time Warner "cable modem".  If
> there were no router in the way, then it is not hard to set up a
> system which could be used by two non-Unix-Sysadmins.  (Not hard
> as long as we have some method for getting the Grand Net facing
> address of one box to the other.  And if we allow dependence on a
> third party then whatismyip.com serves; if we wish to avoid third
> party dependence at this level, likely we will have to set
> something up on the router; and there are other methods too.)
> 
> The home router is today usually:
> 
> 1. a box separate from the home computer
> 
> 2. with a difficult to understand method of programming, that is,
> the ridiculous "web based" fill in the incomprehensible form,
> 
> 3. which form is non-standard
> 
> These three things are, I think, mainly what makes direct
> connection over the Net so hard for most people.  Thus we must
> repair these deficiencies:
> 
> 1. whether the box is grossly physically separate from the home
> computer, its setting up to allow direct comunication with the
> other box cannot require more than putting the name of the owner
> of the other box; likely we should have the router be contained
> in a joint "home computer router" thingie

Just to make sure we're both talking about the same problem-- the 
main problem in #1 is that for Bob's Freedombox to talk to Alice's 
Freedombox, Bob must traverse the stock wifi router/dsl modem by 
poking a hole using port forwarding or some other mechanism to 
allowing two-way communication between the Freedomboxes.  
(I'm assuming here that either Alice doesn't have a NAT traversal to 
worry about or has already magically dealt with it.)

There's no workable "one-click" way to do this as I see it-- some 
routers are open wifi routers, some are not, some are password 
protected-- and of those that are password protected, some have 
a default hardware password, some have a default provider password, 
some have a custom one hidden from the person paying for the account,
and some have a backdoor to allow the 
network owner to push "updates" to the router.  Furthermore some
ISPs allow custom changes through the router's web-interface, some 
have a TOS that disallow but are practically lazy about it, some 
will throttle you, some will "repair" the problem, and probably all would 
become aggressive if there were a large increase in home users
setting up their router for an always-on, multi-service, internationally 
reachable server.

I hope I'm wrong about the difficulty of a one-click solution, but if you 
look at the burgeoning privacy-aware network overlays out there right 
now and realize that those protocols would grow exponentially if any 
of them were to implement a one-click solution, it becomes obvious that 
this isn't a problem that the Freedombox can fix.  (In fact throwing 
hardware at the problem would make it more difficult, as a cross-platform 
software solution would be much cheaper.)

The approaches I can think of are:
a) pagekite et al, which would then become a central point of attack/failure
b) supernodes, which run the danger of de facto centralization (like Diaspora's 
main pod) because there hasn't been enough privacy education for the 
common user to be able to gauge th

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Jay Sulzberger 



On Fri, 25 May 2012, Joshua Spodek  wrote:


Thanks for asking. I find it interesting to see everyone's different
goals. I think my needs overlap with typical non-geek users wanting to
avoid faceless corporations owning my private data.

* Diaspora
* Skype replacement
* Host my own email, blog, photographs
* Seamless backups to friends' Freedomboxes


Suppose we have two people in front of home computers connected
to the Net via Time Warner Cable in Manhattan.  We assume further
that the two people are in their own houses, and that they own
their computers, ordinary sense of "own a computer".

If the two people are Unix sysadmins, then they can arrange to
easily move files from one box to the other.  Say they have set
up a system so that with the push of one button, and the
indication of a file on their computer, the file gets sent to the
other computer.  Such an arrangement would serve, I claim, as a
foundation for what we want.

I think today the main obstacle for non-Unix-sysadmins to running
such a file transfer utility is setting up the "home router",
that is, the router behind the Time Warner "cable modem".  If
there were no router in the way, then it is not hard to set up a
system which could be used by two non-Unix-Sysadmins.  (Not hard
as long as we have some method for getting the Grand Net facing
address of one box to the other.  And if we allow dependence on a
third party then whatismyip.com serves; if we wish to avoid third
party dependence at this level, likely we will have to set
something up on the router; and there are other methods too.)

The home router is today usually:

1. a box separate from the home computer

2. with a difficult to understand method of programming, that is,
the ridiculous "web based" fill in the incomprehensible form,

3. which form is non-standard

These three things are, I think, mainly what makes direct
connection over the Net so hard for most people.  Thus we must
repair these deficiencies:

1. whether the box is grossly physically separate from the home
computer, its setting up to allow direct comunication with the
other box cannot require more than putting the name of the owner
of the other box; likely we should have the router be contained
in a joint "home computer router" thingie

2. no "web form" which asks such questions as "What is the IP
address of your nameserver?" or requests "Enter fibroblast count
E4 and Dunning-Kruger osteoclast rate, EUMED units (not ISO
units!), for your six top friends."

3. the button is standard, the same for every proto Freedom Box^W^W^Wstandard 
box

ad Skype: last I checked, about five years ago, Gnome Net Meeting
was just fine.  The question of connection to the PSTN I ignore.

ad email: Yes.

ad convenient storage: Yes.

ad difficulties of defense and authentication: I hope to write
this year something on this.

oo--JS.

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Joshua Spodek 
Thanks for asking. I find it interesting to see everyone's different
goals. I think my needs overlap with typical non-geek users wanting to
avoid faceless corporations owning my private data.

* Diaspora
* Skype replacement
* Host my own email, blog, photographs
* Seamless backups to friends' Freedomboxes


___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Samuel Rose 
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Nick M. Daly  wrote:
> So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might end up chasing
> ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...") instead of actual,
> deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd like to hear from
> folks what you'd actually like to use the system for.  If enough people
> get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it a priority for
> the next hackfest.


I am working on a collection of software to run small,medium, and
large sized organic farms/permaculture installations, provide
automation, sensing, etc. (to be released)

I am writing some of the applications in erlang, and so a network of
Freedom Boxes could handle data gathering. Possibly recording to data
grid such as iRODS. Sensor networks and accompanying applications
could benefit from both Jabber and AMQP via RabbitMQ.  I've also
considered using a cluster of freedom boxes as a Eucalyptus "cloud"
for the aforementioned applications.



>
> I want to use it as:
>
> - A Jabber Server.
>
> - A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).
>
> - A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
>  down somewhere).
>
> Anybody else?
>
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss



-- 
--
Sam Rose
Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
email: samuel.r...@gmail.com
http://hollymeadcapital.com
http://p2pfoundation.net
http://socialmediaclassroom.com

"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human
ambition." - Carl Sagan

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Isaac Wilder 
On 05/25/2012 11:19 AM, Anders Jackson wrote:
> - p2p backup on other FreedomBoxes
> Would be not to hard built upon git-annex, as Elena ``of Valhalla''
> mentioned.  I can be set up so that each file is stored in more than one
> place, and synced when needed.
This could also be accomplished with a tahoe grid. I'm not familiar with
git-annex, but it's good to have options.
>
> Jabber would also be a good infrastructure to build upon.  It's
> designed to do a lot more than just chat. Could be used to transfer keys
> and smal files.
I would see us build our general messaging platform around XMPP. What
are the options for interop with email?
>
> - remote file storage
> Again, git-annex as a backup and file storage.
>
> - music streaming
> Streaming on local network or outside of your local network?  Streaming
> inside is easy. I uses Firefly Media Server (mt-daapd) for RSP and DAAP
> (iTune protocol). Works great with Linux boxes. :)
> Then you can use VPN to get that out of your home.
>
> I also would really like to have IPv6, IPsec and DNSSEC. This is could
> be a killer app for the box. IPv6 routing, tunneling and firewall easily
> done between FreedomBoxes and nodes out on usual IPv6 using IPsec.  And
> users doesn't even need to know that they are tunneling.
>
> An IPv6 implementation must support IPsec, you "only" need to distribute
> keys to your peers.  There FreedomBox could be usefull.  All modern
> OS:es has support for IPv6, so routing through a Freedom box wouldn't be
> that hard.
+1 for v6 routing.
Any particular reason why you suggest IPsec?
>
>> Also, dont forget this kind of usefulness of the boxes result into
>> more instalations, where we can sneak back all the privacy stuff we
>> want :)
>> The shared social key managment is the first thing i would like to
>> ser working btw
> I agree with you.  This IS important, to get something to the "market"
> fast.  I would love to see IPv6 as a part of the first shipping.  And
> Linux Contaniers, LXC.
Could you elaborate on why the box should ship with LXC? Is this to make
it easy to add stuff later? I feel like on an intentionally low power
system, running containers is a bit ambitious wrt system resources.
>
> These other stuff is also important, but could be added later.
>
> Yours, Anders.
>
>
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Michael Rauch 

On 05/25/2012 12:45 AM, Nick M. Daly wrote:

[..]

I want to use it as:

- A Jabber Server.

- A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).

- A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
   down somewhere).

Anybody else?


my wishlist:
- address book, calendaring, bookmarks, file storage (synced & sharable)
- blog & photo sharing
- identity provider for WebID, OpenID and OAuth2
- email archive
- wiki

my box stays at home while friends, general public and myself will 
access it from office computers, home computers and mobile devices.


-michael





___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Anders Jackson 
- p2p backup on other FreedomBoxes
Would be not to hard built upon git-annex, as Elena ``of Valhalla''
mentioned.  I can be set up so that each file is stored in more than one
place, and synced when needed.

Jabber would also be a good infrastructure to build upon.  It's
designed to do a lot more than just chat. Could be used to transfer keys
and smal files.

- remote file storage
Again, git-annex as a backup and file storage.

- music streaming
Streaming on local network or outside of your local network?  Streaming
inside is easy. I uses Firefly Media Server (mt-daapd) for RSP and DAAP
(iTune protocol). Works great with Linux boxes. :)
Then you can use VPN to get that out of your home.

I also would really like to have IPv6, IPsec and DNSSEC. This is could
be a killer app for the box. IPv6 routing, tunneling and firewall easily
done between FreedomBoxes and nodes out on usual IPv6 using IPsec.  And
users doesn't even need to know that they are tunneling.

An IPv6 implementation must support IPsec, you "only" need to distribute
keys to your peers.  There FreedomBox could be usefull.  All modern
OS:es has support for IPv6, so routing through a Freedom box wouldn't be
that hard.

> Also, dont forget this kind of usefulness of the boxes result into
> more instalations, where we can sneak back all the privacy stuff we
> want :)
> The shared social key managment is the first thing i would like to
> ser working btw

I agree with you.  This IS important, to get something to the "market"
fast.  I would love to see IPv6 as a part of the first shipping.  And
Linux Contaniers, LXC.

These other stuff is also important, but could be added later.

Yours, Anders.


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread bnewbold 


short term practical wants:

- redundant git repository backup
- redundant crypto key backup (eg, "plan B" to regain access to other
  servers/identity)
- "personal information" store: address book, calendering
- VPN/tor/ipv6/cjdns end node (as a gateway for other traffic)
- general purpose shell account

longer term "nice to have":

- redundant searchable email store (but probably not actual server)
- e-currency wallet (eg bitcoin)
- real time messaging server/node (IRC, irssi, xmpp, SIP, voice+video chat)
- distributed/redundant file backup with Tahoe-LAFS
- distributed/redundant sharded crypto key backup (for friends)
- as a gateway for other traffic:
  - https-everywhere enforcement
  - ad/cookie/tracking filtering
  - caching for performance
  - persistant SSL, dnssec, ipsec, gpg certificate/key store, warn on change
  - IPv6 tunneling
- ultimately, to migrate from rented "cloud" VPS to owned plug computer
  hardware for most hosting needs

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Rick Hodgin 
I've been reading responses and thinking about this.

The device needs to be as low power as possible, so they can run the longest on 
the least power in places where power is scarce. For nowthis is a somewhat 
lesser concern, but I think something worthy of the longer-term consideration.

If Freedombox has the ability to handle traditional networking with the 
encryption layer automatically enabled (MonkeySphere), and can function as part 
of an independent adhoc mesh network (preferably using longer distance 
technology like WiMAX), then all other software requests should fall in place 
relatively easily as part of the traditional Debian / Linux software stack.

As a software developer, I have wanted to contribute to Freedombox.  But I know 
nothing of the toolsets in place.  I know C and C++ quite well and would be 
able to work with future modifications to existing code bases in those areas.  
I also understand a lot of theory and could help in those areas.

Still, I think our primary goal is networking and the ability to securely 
communicate.  All other wants seem to fall automatically in line after that, as 
I know there are dozens of developers itching to begin using this secure 
mechanism, enabling software solutions which are not part of the traditional 
Internet and it's non-anonymous user footprint.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin

--- On Thu, 5/24/12, Rick C. Hodgin  wrote:

> From: Rick C. Hodgin 
> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?
> To: "Nick M. Daly" , 
> freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> Date: Thursday, May 24, 2012, 7:27 PM
> Mesh network, dropbox.
> 
> Best regards,
> Rick C. Hodgin
> 
>  Original Message 
>  From: Nick M. Daly 
>  Sent: Thu, May 24, 2012 06:45 PM
>  To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
>  CC: 
>  Subject: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the
> FreedomBox for?
> 
> >So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might
> end up chasing
> >ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...")
> instead of actual,
> >deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd
> like to hear from
> >folks what you'd actually like to use the system
> for.  If enough people
> >get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it
> a priority for
> >the next hackfest.
> >
> >I want to use it as:
> >
> >- A Jabber Server.
> >
> >- A replacement for DropBox (a file storage /
> synchronization system).
> >
> >- A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas
> I want to write
> >  down somewhere).
> >
> >Anybody else?
> >
> >___
> >Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> >Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> >http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
> 

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread James Valleroy 
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Nick M. Daly  wrote:

> So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might end up chasing
> ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...") instead of actual,
> deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd like to hear from
> folks what you'd actually like to use the system for.  If enough people
> get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it a priority for
> the next hackfest.
>
> I want to use it as:
>
> - A Jabber Server.
>
> - A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).
>
> - A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
>  down somewhere).
>
> Anybody else?
>
>
Eventually I would like to see a distributed implementation of Ripple (
http://ripple-project.org/).  I think FreedomBox's secure identities and
communications would provide a good foundation for this.
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread alberto fuentes 
On May 25, 2012 11:13 AM, "Robert Martinez"  wrote:

+1 to all of these

> - p2p backup on other FreedomBoxes
Im making a little script to be able to launch services when nobody is
using the network. Since is a home server i dont want to annoy other
inhabitans of the house... :)
Right now i have a cheap raid box in raid1. With a remote copy in another
of my dreamplug it would prevent a fire in the house lose of data. Also
faster access to the backup since you could access directly to the copy in
your local server

> - remote file storage
Im going to try ownclown for that. It seems nice

> - music streaming
I havent look at this yet, but it would be nice

Also, dont forget this kind of usefulness of the boxes result into more
instalations, where we can sneak back all the privacy stuff we want :)
The shared social key managment is the first thing i would like to ser
working btw
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Robert Martinez 

my dreamlist:

- status.net, friendica, ...
- jabber (with audio/video calls & working file transfer!)
- mail
- contacts/calendar syncing

- p2p backup on other FreedomBoxes
- remote file storage
- music streaming


___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Elena ``of Valhalla'' 
On 2012-05-25 at 08:44:07 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 07:27:32PM -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > Mesh network, dropbox.
> Owncloud would seem a good application -- appropriately contained (virtual 
> jail),
> of course.

For the drop-box part there is also the git-annex_ frontend that 
has just been funded via kickstarter_.

I already use git-annex to manage data files on various devices, 
both connected and non-connected to the internet, and it 
works excellently, so I'm looking forward for the ability 
to recommend it to less technical friends.

.. _git-annex: http://git-annex.branchable.com/
.. _kickstarter: 
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/joeyh/git-annex-assistant-like-dropbox-but-with-your-own

Advantages include the fact that it is written in haskell instead 
of php, and that the author is a debian developer, so git-annex 
is already available in debian and the assistant will 
probably be quite soon after it's done.

-- 
Elena ``of Valhalla''


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-25 Thread Dan Ballance 
This looks an interesting project. I've not seen this before, thanks :)
On 25 May 2012 07:44, "Eugen Leitl"  wrote:

> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 07:27:32PM -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > Mesh network, dropbox.
>
> Owncloud would seem a good application -- appropriately contained (virtual
> jail),
> of course.
>
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-24 Thread Eugen Leitl 
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 08:44:07AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 07:27:32PM -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > Mesh network, dropbox.
> 
> Owncloud would seem a good application -- appropriately contained (virtual 
> jail),
> of course.

Oh -- and I forgot Tahoe LAFS, of course.

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-24 Thread Eugen Leitl 
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 07:27:32PM -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Mesh network, dropbox.

Owncloud would seem a good application -- appropriately contained (virtual 
jail),
of course.

___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-24 Thread Dan Ballance 
Hi,

Probably somewhat idealistic, but I would eventually like freedombox to be:

* a distributed p2p social media network;
* a basic replacement for as many commercial cloud services that track and
monitor us as possible, so: gmail, gdocs, gcalendar, drop box etc
* a mesh network for resilience

Any first steps towards this would be fantastic. Some basic p2p distributed
social media tool that connects freedom boxes would be a great early mile
stone i think because we could then start building a community and having
these discussions via the freedom box network. I imagine we could start to
grow a user-base with that in place.

dan :)
On 24 May 2012 23:46, "Nick M. Daly"  wrote:

> So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might end up chasing
> ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...") instead of actual,
> deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd like to hear from
> folks what you'd actually like to use the system for.  If enough people
> get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it a priority for
> the next hackfest.
>
> I want to use it as:
>
> - A Jabber Server.
>
> - A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).
>
> - A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
>  down somewhere).
>
> Anybody else?
>
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-24 Thread Stephen Michael Kellat 

On 05/24/2012 06:45 PM, Nick M. Daly wrote:

So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might end up chasing
ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...") instead of actual,
deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd like to hear from
folks what you'd actually like to use the system for.  If enough people
get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it a priority for
the next hackfest.

I want to use it as:

- A Jabber Server.

- A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).

- A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
   down somewhere).




* Easy to deploy MediaGoblin subsystem for sharing media
* Easy to deploy ikiwiki subsystem (or something else cool) for wiki use
* Easy to deploy podcast/vodcast downloader subsystem mated with a media 
sharing subsystem so that I can watch/listen using appropriate receivers 
throughout the house


Stephen Michael Kellat
Ashtabula Township, Ohio



___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-24 Thread Isaac Wilder 
Nick,
Thanks for starting this thread. I'm intending to dive into a fbx sprint
over the next couple of weeks, so this is really good timing. My first
priority is to keep hacking on a distributed key=>address mechanism to
pair with your Santiago implementation. After that, these are the first
applications I would want to plug in:

-Jabber Server
-Plans
-Dropbox
-wiki (etherpad?)

All self explanatory, except for 'plans'.
What I mean here is something akin to the finger function from unix.
Each of us would have a page that would we could update with hypertext
as we please, you could add others to an 'autofinger' list that would
alert you when they had updated their 'plan'. This is something that we
did at Grinnell College, and it's by far the most pleasant form of
social networking that I've ever experienced. Should be straightforward
to implement is a fully decentralized way. I know that this strays from
the point a bit, but I just want to say that if we hope to build
decentralized social network services that compete, we've got to be
inventive. This is one of the main problems that I see with diaspora.
Sure, it's federated, but it basically just tried to emulate Facebook's
UX. We can do better, and I think that means stripping things down to
their rudiments.


I think that those four would be a really good, valuable start, and are
highly tractable. A ZRTP/SIP application would be my fifth addition, but
I think that we can hold off on that for the time being.



imw


On 05/24/2012 07:27 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Mesh network, dropbox.
>
> Best regards,
> Rick C. Hodgin
>
>  Original Message 
>  From: Nick M. Daly 
>  Sent: Thu, May 24, 2012 06:45 PM
>  To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
>  CC: 
>  Subject: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?
>
>> So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might end up chasing
>> ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...") instead of actual,
>> deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd like to hear from
>> folks what you'd actually like to use the system for.  If enough people
>> get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it a priority for
>> the next hackfest.
>>
>> I want to use it as:
>>
>> - A Jabber Server.
>>
>> - A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).
>>
>> - A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
>>  down somewhere).
>>
>> Anybody else?
>>
>> ___
>> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
>> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
> ___
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss


___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss

Re: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

2012-05-24 Thread Rick C. Hodgin 
Mesh network, dropbox.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin

 Original Message 
 From: Nick M. Daly 
 Sent: Thu, May 24, 2012 06:45 PM
 To: freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
 CC: 
 Subject: [Freedombox-discuss] What Do You want to use the FreedomBox for?

>So, I always worry that we (as a list and project) might end up chasing
>ideals or hypotheticals ("wouldn't it be cool if...") instead of actual,
>deliverable, software.  To help prevent that, I'd like to hear from
>folks what you'd actually like to use the system for.  If enough people
>get behind any particular idea, we should try to make it a priority for
>the next hackfest.
>
>I want to use it as:
>
>- A Jabber Server.
>
>- A replacement for DropBox (a file storage / synchronization system).
>
>- A wiki/Evernote replacement (for all those crazy ideas I want to write
>  down somewhere).
>
>Anybody else?
>
>___
>Freedombox-discuss mailing list
>Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
>http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
___
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss