Hello to everyone and sorry for not answering the list sooner. I'm still in
Brazil for another ten days and just spent the last four days in the
jungle. I am highly motivated to help this project fly, but most of the
work will have to wait until I'm back in my cold country from 3rd of
December onwards.
I think the name Community Networks is more of a household name, so in that
sense it might be catchier for the masses. On the other hand, DC3 is a
catchier acronym than DCCN. Community Networks and Community Connectivity
both suite our purposes as I understand the reason for creating this group,
which is to create a source of knowledge to help people build their own
networks that can be again linked to each other. At the very least, it
should have information on the engineering perspective of those networks,
both hardware and software, and collect the best practices on the DC3
website. Like somebody already put it, it's not the name that counts, but
what we do for it.
This group should start with the engineering, because it is a more accurate
science than the other mentioned areas, that this group could be doing. It
seems more concrete and the results can be easily measured. Other areas
like the legal framework for individual countries' allowed radio frequency
should probably follow fairly soon. I feel that the engineering part is the
biggest threshold stopping people from creating their own networks and it
is something that we should ask for help from groups like IETF and IEEE to
decide what those best practices would be. I have an impression that a lot
of technical geniuses work in them.
The website could be mirrored and hosted in different countries so that
it's as accessible as possible, and it'd be important to be able to pull
all the available information for offline reading too. I can help in making
the website front-end and coordinating things, for I'm not technically that
talented. I still want to participate because I think this project can make
an immense impact for the connectedness of all mankind. There are also
gains in privacy and availability of information to circumvent totalitarian
means that obstruct the flows of information. Just the project for a
Pirate, and our global political movement can help to push this project
forward and start building networks in over fifty countries.
We need at least two profiles for the website, rural and urban, but there
might be reasons to make more, to differentiate best practices for
metropolis-size cities and smaller townships. The equipment should be as
cheap as possible without damaging the quality of the network and I think
governments could actually chip in to boost the building of robust and
resilient networks for their citizens. I've heard rasberry pi is enough to
have a node in a MESH-network, but correct me if I'm wrong. It would also
be useful to be able to use old computers, because they can be acquired
freely and it prolongs their lifespan.
I hope I didn't rant on too much, but I wanted to blurt out all the
thoughts I've had on this project for many years already. I'm totally in
favor of learning some engineering skills for this and I've wanted to setup
a MESH-network in Helsinki for a long time already. I'm probably unemployed
for quite a while now, so I should have quite a bit of time on my hands. I
am really looking forward to working with all of you.
Raoul Plommer
https://twitter.com/plomm3r
https://fb.com/plommer
On 20 November 2015 at 10:47, Leandro Navarro <leandro(a)pangea.org> wrote:
Good to me too, Leandro.
On 19/11/15 19:32, Nicolás Echániz wrote:
On 11/19/2015 02:16 PM, parminder wrote:
On Thursday 19 November 2015 08:56 PM, Nicolás
Echániz wrote:
Parminder,
Maybe: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity would be better?
(and we can keep the DC3 acronym)
Nico
It is certainly better than connected communities.
Bob is OK with this option, Parminder prefers it, I tend to agree after
this discussion.
So I propose we keep: *Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity* as
the name for this DC. While less "poetic" to my ear, it seems to better
describe our purpose and it does not present the bad aspects discussed
regarding the first option.
Can we agree on this? Is this OK for the rest who shared in this
discussion? Luca, Leandro, Mike, Ritu?
Cheers,
Nico
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3