←back to thread

A New Future for Icanhazip

(major.io)
980 points nkcmr | 5 comments | 06 Jun 21 19:21 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
toxik ◴[06 Jun 21 19:50 UTC] No.27415754[source]▶
Chinese originated spam and abuse is so outrageously widespread, I don’t understand why there isn’t a conversation going on about cutting them off from the wider internet. They blocked most of it anyway.
replies(8): >>27415770 #>>27415797 #>>27415801 #>>27416273 #>>27416375 #>>27416773 #>>27416937 #>>27417395 #
wyager ◴[06 Jun 21 19:53 UTC] No.27415770[source]▶
I would rather have a global network with marginally more spam than a regional network with marginally less.
replies(3): >>27415826 #>>27415879 #>>27416080 #
systemvoltage ◴[06 Jun 21 20:02 UTC] No.27415826[source]▶
I believe in reciprocity. China has blocked a lot of the western traffic. So, the west should block China. If they open up, we should welcome them with open arms. Similar spirit as some open source licenses - reciprocity creates fairness and increases collaboration, prevents hawks in a population of doves and improves stability.

We are already doing this with trade. The amount of leeway and free lunch China has gotten from the west is insane. I don’t blame China, I blame the west and the rest of the world for not preventing it. Asymmetrical policies are often exploited by capitalism and governments have been caught off guard.

I’m not an Anti-China lunatic. It’s just common sense.

replies(5): >>27415887 #>>27416359 #>>27416704 #>>27417204 #>>27417330 #
1. dvfjsdhgfv ◴[06 Jun 21 21:09 UTC] No.27416359[source]▶
The lives of people in China trying to use Internet services outside are already miserable; let's not make it worse and alienate others. We should treat them just like the rest: if extensive malicious traffic arrives, we drop it, but we don't ban the entire country.
replies(1): >>27416503 #
2. toxik ◴[06 Jun 21 21:28 UTC] No.27416503[source]▶
The internet is built on institutional trust. You can’t have a properly functioning network when a sizable part is just not giving a shit about its users abusing your users.

It very much echoes the problems of intellectual property theft in China.

replies(2): >>27416709 #>>27417210 #
3. crumbshot ◴[06 Jun 21 21:54 UTC] No.27416709[source]▶
This supposed 'intellectual property theft' is mostly just reverse engineering of technology.

It's not really a problem anyway. If some capitalists in the US and Europe don't get to skim off a slice of profit from another country's manufacturing output, then so what?

4. wyager ◴[06 Jun 21 23:08 UTC] No.27417210[source]▶
> The internet is built on institutional trust.

No it’s not. What is this even supposed to mean?

replies(1): >>27418753 #
5. posguy ◴[07 Jun 21 03:33 UTC] No.27418753{3}[source]▶
Autonomous system (AS) operators should not act in bad faith towards other AS networks they peer with. BGP hijacking is an example of abuse of this institutional trust, same for DNS hijacking.

If this trust is repeatedly broken, peering networks may be forced to depeer the AS as a result, like what happened to McColo when they were depeered.