From: "Jeffrey E." <jeevacation®gmail.com>

From: "Jeffrey E." <jeevacation®gmail.com> To: Danny Hillis Subject: Fwd: Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 01:58:59 +0000 Forwarded messa e From: Jeremy Rubin Date: Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 9:51 AM Subject: Re: To: "jeffrey E." <[email protected]> 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 internet 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. 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 think it would require very dose 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://w.vw.infoq.corniarticles/cap-twelve-years-later-how-the-rules-have-changed) but unable to get all 3 as they mutually assure each others 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 intemet 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.org/wiki/Zooke/027s 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, ifs another to have motive enough to actually build such a new network. Asides from the button, what properties seem critical to you? gieremyRubin On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 7:08 AM, Jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote: I liked the idea of intemet 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 EFTA00822794 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 [email protected], 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 [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved EFTA00822795