RFC 8890 – The Internet is for End Users (2020)

(mnot.net)

82 points | by notarobot123 5 hours ago ago

24 comments

  • dlcarrier 4 hours ago ago

    Inevitably the internet will have two types of users:

        1. The anti-bot bots that must stop you from proceeding, because they aren't entirely sure you aren't a bot
    
    and

        2. The bots that can get past them, which we all must eventually deploy, if we want a chance to visit a web page
    • ACCount37 3 hours ago ago

      Why would anyone ever want to solve 99 Cloudflare captchas a day if you can get a bot to do it instead?

      • iso1631 3 hours ago ago

        Literally used an LLM to answer the latest one 20 minutes ago, which was "what can climb a tree".

        Cloudflare is a blight on the internet, but HN loves it.

        • pocksuppet 2 hours ago ago

          Cloudflare just started blocking Googlebot, so maybe we'll see an exodus away from Cloudflare by people who want their sites indexed? Hopefully?

          • warkdarrior 2 hours ago ago

            I thought Google Search is dead, everyone is using ChatGPT now to find information.

            • fl4regun an hour ago ago

              but how does chatGPT find information?

              • tempodox an hour ago ago

                With bots that break through cloudflare captchas. As a human, I immediately close the browser tab when I see one. If you make your site inaccessible for humans, only the bots remain.

                • fl4regun 30 minutes ago ago

                  I was more so asking how does it know where to look to find information, if things are no longer being indexed.

        • dormento an hour ago ago

          Cloudflare spreads everywhere and kills the drive to do nice things. It is akin to a disease.

          The question is, what is the alternative to cloudflare? We've tried (to various degrees) user id, micropayments, device attestation... I'm not hopeful we can actually solve this. Maybe if there was a neutral, "NGO-like" cloudflare of some sort?

          • eqvinox 41 minutes ago ago

            > Cloudflare spreads everywhere and kills the drive to do nice things.

            How about an internet where we don't need CloudFlare?

            One without zillions of AI crawlers and script kiddies with Terabit DDoS capability… (the latter being the harder problem)

        • ivanjermakov an hour ago ago

          > but HN loves it

          There is popular sentiment on HN that CF is making internet worse by being a core infrastructure element most websites use.

          • tempodox an hour ago ago

            It’s not the core infrastructure part that makes the internet worse.

  • aftbit 4 hours ago ago

    The internet is for whoever wants to send bits to each other and is willing to pay for transit to do it. The WWW might be for end users, though that seems less obvious by the day.

    • pocksuppet 2 hours ago ago

      Right. The RFC is attempting to clarify the IETF's official position. The IETF is not the internet police, and can't make other actors obey.

      We can make our own internet though - with blackhack and jookers.

      • lenerdenator an hour ago ago

        Honestly, I feel like your draft could dispense with the internet part of the proposal.

    • supermaurio2000 4 hours ago ago

      what you write is excactly the problem the RFC tries to address. And not only for http but for the whole internet protocol family.

      • reactordev 3 hours ago ago

        sorry but that ship has sailed.

  • Atlas667 an hour ago ago

    This is why ideology is so important.

    Is the end user viewed as an ISPs client? a consumer of tech companies?

    The idealistic language is fine but isnt based on any scientific approach to society. Its neutral at best.

    The internet is for end users, but how if its not "by end users"?

    If most protocols and standard implementations depend on adoption by ISPs and tech companies what does it mean to be "for the end user"?

    Is prison architecture "for the prisoners"?

    So how do we solve the "by end users" dilemma?

  • iso1631 4 hours ago ago

    Who's an end user.

    Unless you own your hardware, you aren't the end user. When your phone, tv, camera, or even laptop on a non-free OS is on your network, you can get some semblance of control by controlling what network services it uses.

    Things like DoH are part of the removal of my control as a home user and give it to Sony, or Apple, or TPLink

    The most obvious thing is it becomes harder to block adverts.

    Throw in internet-centralisation through HN darlings like cloudflare and you're screwed. You have no idea what anything is talking to, as it's the same destination IPs, so the choice is either block it completely, or allow it with no control.

    • 1718627440 4 hours ago ago

      I do share your actual concern, but I think the term 'end user' applies to any human sitting in front of a computer, trying to achieve something, independently of whether the effective sysadmin works against his interests or not.

      • __MatrixMan__ 3 hours ago ago

        Right, it's not about property, it's just about whether the computer is helpful to the immediately available human or whether it serves some remote one.

    • remix2000 4 hours ago ago

      > Who's an end user.

      I think in this context it'd be any netizen who does not hold a significant amount of power to influence other [unrelated to them] netizens?

      • iso1631 3 hours ago ago

        So me. The only influence I have over what "my" phone does is monitoring and blocking what it connects to when it's connected to my network.

        DoH works against that

  • paulddraper 3 hours ago ago

    This is an awkward read, the result of trying to convey an idea while couched in other language.

    That idea being that AI is less important than humans.