
Ever heard of "Low orbit server stations"? - flux_w42
http://thepiratebay.com/blog/210
======
marcamillion
I love Pirate Bay for pushing the envelope with everything they do. Personal
opinions on piracy aside...the approach these guys take to to solving their
problems, are always innovative. They push us to really think outside of the
box of what is possible.

Most 'sane' people would be burned out by constantly fighting "the man" for so
long. But these guys seem like they are machines.

Love it!

~~~
naner
_I love Pirate Bay for pushing the envelope with everything they do._

They have a lot of big lofty ideas but they often are unable to execute on
them or they flop right after they get out the gate. Remember the time they
were going to buy an island? Or when the bought the IFPI domain? The Suprnova
relaunch? BOiNK? SlopsBox? ShareReactor? Baywords? ViO? The Video Bay? Also,
and I can't find any info on this, but I'm pretty sure awhile back they
claimed they were going to develop a new p2p protocol for anonymous
filesharing.

I'm guessing this won't ever get off the ground, so to speak. It seems wildly
impractical.

~~~
sodiumphosphate
This is exactly the kind of endless stream of intellectually stimulating but
mostly infeasible ideas that manifest in the mind of an intelligent person who
consumes a certain amount of cannabinoids.

( I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing. )

~~~
GFischer
Hey, crappy infeasible ideas are not exclusive to people who consume
cannabinoids :) , I have those too.

Now, if only my useless brain would come up with a non-infeasible and decent
idea to turn into a startup... :)

Edit: non-flamebait, do the people behind TPB consume cannabinoids? I haven't
read their bios.

Edit2: obligatory XKCD <http://xkcd.com/553/>

------
rmc
People have been putting their servers in the cloud for a while now.

~~~
thehodge
Whilst I don't want to turn this into a reddit style pun thread.. that
genuinely made me laugh out loud

~~~
ohashi
Once in a while you just have to give someone credit.

------
polemic
"A real act of war" - or, more likely, an act of civil aviation rule
enforcement.

Obstructing airspace is a pretty serious issue. Unlike copyright law in
general, there will be absolutely no absolutely no legal ambiguity if one of
their machines is a public safety problem. That's hefty fines or jail time
with little chance of public sympathy.

~~~
sbierwagen
In the United States, restricted airspace is (broadly, the rules are not
simple) between 1,200 and 60,000 feet. Above and below that is unrestricted
airspace.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace_class_%28United_State...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace_class_%28United_States%29)

Pedantic niggle regarding TFA: Putting a server in a balloon is nothing at all
like achieving orbit. An object in orbit is both _high_ and _fast._ Really
high (160km) and really fast. (7.8km/s) 7.8 kilometres per second is _17,000
miles per hour._

A server in a balloon is not in orbit in much the same way that a toddler in a
tricycle is not a F1 car.

~~~
polemic
Weirdly - we were talking in the office last week about what it would take to
get something into orbit from, for example, a rail gun.

We calculated that for a 100m rail gun and a 0.5 kilogram payload you'd need
to feed it about a 100 MW power source (over about a tenth of a second) to
accelerate it to the necessary 7.8 km/s. That doesn't include the energy
needed to get it to altitude.

Naturally, if TPB could actually put something into orbit on a commercially
viable basis, they could probably afford to fund their pirate service as a
teeny part of the Enormous Space Freighting Corporation that would naturally
to ensure... just sayin'.

~~~
kragen
A friend of mine just mentioned <http://startram.com/> to me this weekend;
apparently sending something into orbit from a ground-mounted rail gun is
possible in certain parts of the world. They also propose magnetically
levitating the end of the railgun by a few thousand more meters for a later
version that can use lower G-forces. Last year I did some calculations about
mounting the railgun on a dirigible:
[http://lists.canonical.org/pipermail/kragen-
tol/2011-August/...](http://lists.canonical.org/pipermail/kragen-
tol/2011-August/000939.html)

The usual way to power railguns (or particle accelerators) is with giant high-
voltage capacitors, which can discharge their energy very quickly. I forget
the term of art used for this particular kind of capacitor, unfortunately.
Startram suggests using superconducting magnetic energy storage, which has
apparently become practical recently; and giant homopolar generators with
flywheels are another (low-voltage) alternative.

------
latch
Isn't this the core spirit of the internet? ARPANET was designed to "emphasize
robustness and survivability, including the capability to withstand losses of
large portions of the underlying networks."

I've heard of remote parts of the world relying on amateur radios to access
the internet (citation needed, please). This approach, to me, is simply a more
technologically sophisticated. But it's nevertheless beautiful.

~~~
stonemetal
_The goal was to use low-cost commercial radio equipment to connect users on
Oahu and the other Hawaiian islands with a central time-sharing computer on
the main Oahu campus._

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALOHAnet>

It worked out pretty well, 3G mobile phones use a variant of the communication
protocol.

~~~
bostonvaulter2
Not to mention inspiring wired Ethernet.

------
dhughes
In Canada uncontrolled airspace are the areas not in an aerodrome and goes up
to 1,500 feet (?), I forget the exact height, that's where radio controlled
planes, hangliders, ultra-light aircraft, hot air balloons can go without
needing a pilot's license or special permit.

If there was some device floating or flying there but not in controlled
airspace or a danger to other aircraft it is perfectly legal for it to be
there.

~~~
blantonl
Airspace classes in the United States:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace_class_(United_States)>

~~~
Permit
Would US Airspace law be at all relevant? My understanding is that TPB goes
out of their way to avoid conducting their business anywhere near the United
States.

I imagine airspace classes in Europe would be a more valid topic.

~~~
discodave
Airspace law in other countries is likely to be similar or less restrictive.

------
dfc
What a difference a title makes...

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3720699>

~~~
cd34
+time

------
stephengillie
When I heard Reddit planning to build a low-orbit network, I realized they
were going to build the "outernet". This is another stab in the same
direction, and I would be surprised if the 2 forces didn't join.

This airborne/orbital network, combined with the "innernet" TOR, will allow
for the future of the unregulated internet.

The original internet will become the walled garden that half of humanity
wants to live within. Those of us in the other half will have our free
innernet and outernet.

------
wisty
How about doing what radio pirates did, and having a station in international
waters?

You are still bound by whatever law your vessel is registered under, but many
of them just don't care. If you (probably illegally) could send out an
autonomous unregistered vessel, it would be really hard to take out.

An armada of solar powered autonomous buoys ... that would also be kind of
cool.

~~~
rdl
There are ITU treaties and maritime laws which have changed since the pirate
radio period of the 1960s, mainly to eliminate that possibility (mostly as a
secondary consequence of trying to prevent platforms for territorial claims
for oil/gas/mining at sea being used to exploit resources far from shore.)

I actually don't know what the rules would be for an autonomous sea robot
(which wasn't transmitting, and which wasn't a hazard to navigation), like
those ocean monitoring glider things. It might still have to be registered as
a ship with a flag, but I don't know if there would be liability (other than
seizure of the robot) for the operators otherwise.

------
objclxt
"This way our machines will have to be shut down with aeroplanes in order to
shut down the system [...] with modern radio transmitters we can get over
100Mbps per node up to 50km away"

...or just jam the signal, surely? If you were _that_ serious about it...

~~~
4ad
It would be very difficult to jam a CDMA signal.

~~~
tedunangst
Because it's frequency hopping? I'm not an expert, but I thought that was only
hard with a single antenna. If you can broadcast noise on all the channels,
it's still jammable. No?

~~~
Nrsolis
To suggest that jamming a CDMA signal is impossible is BEYOND ignorant.

It is trivially easy to jam a CDMA signal. Hell, when Qualcomm was trying to
get CDMA off the ground, they used to do it to themselves ALL THE TIME.

For the interested, just Google IS-95A for Crtl-F for Walsh code. Mix one part
clock sync'ed publicly known Walsh Code with one part bit randomness. Stir
gently and enjoy.

~~~
nowarninglabel
Except that no one suggested it was impossible...which leaves one to wonder
why you are using ad hominem against an argument that was never made.

~~~
Nrsolis
My apologies. What I meant to say is that jamming a CDMA signal is TRIVIALLY
easy. It's been done, it doesn't require a lot of equipment, and it's very
very effective.

There have been MULTIPLE attacks against supposedly jam-proof wireless systems
that not only showed that they we not only jammable, but that the mechanism
designed to make them jam proof only made it easier.

In particular, the control channels that manage access to the air interface
are notoriously vulnerable to disruption.

So my beef is that the idea that a spread spectrum system is somehow more
resistant to jamming is just plain wrong.

------
bdunbar
An airplane a few kilometers in the air is _not_ in orbit.

Pity - if they had the bucks and the chops to actually orbit a server ... now
that would be something.

~~~
Nick_C
Australia is about to do this for bases in Antarctica (which all suffer from
sporadic satellite coverage). The cheapest solution is two non-geosynchronous
satellites in opposition to each other on highly elliptical orbits, providing
pretty much constant coverage.

Total cost is about $40,000,000.

<http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/3453168.htm>

~~~
nikcub
It wouldn't be impossible for TPB to raise $50M, I would think

Especially if it was for the purpose of launching a couple of satellites.

~~~
coopdog
One hell of a kickstarter project... I'd donate

------
twiceaday
"This way our machines will have to be shut down with aeroplanes in order to
shut down the system. A real act of war."

In my current state of disenfranchisement with the government I will not be
surprised if this happens. They took the "ends will justify the means" policy
long ago. All I can do is hope their latest 'ends' benefit me.

~~~
ataggart
_"They took the "ends will justify the means" policy long ago."_

To be fair, with negligible exception, everyone of every political bent takes
that policy.

------
moe
That's hilarious but not remotely feasible, is it April 1st yet?

------
bshep
Had to look at the date to make sure it isn't April 1st yet.

------
ethereal
How are they planning on powering these devices? The original article doesn't
mention . . .

Solar seems the most obvious choice (to me).

~~~
rmc
Solar in Scandinavia?

One of the real problems with solar is that you need a lot of surface, which
means more weight, which means more power needed...

~~~
ricardobeat
Solar cells can generate around 80% their peak energy even on cloudy days.

~~~
Zirro
It's not that I don't believe you, but it almost sounds too good to be true.
Do you have any sources? What happens during night-time?

------
stevear
In order for this to work you have to get the balloon high enough where it
won't be affected by simple weather patterns.

Then you have to make the device capable of withstanding extreme conditions.

Then you have to make the balloon stay in position.

Then you have to swap out the balloon's every X day to refuel and recharge.

Predicting the future here: they will make a balloon and radio system that
works for about 20 minutes before it drifts off and then realize there is a
whole lot more to putting computers in the sky than just announcing you are
going to move your data-center into the sky.

------
est
Image a satellite BitTorrent tracker which flies over your head every 90
minutes. You got a 5 minute handshake window to discover the peer network,
then the rest is handled on DHT.

------
DanBlake
Such a awesome idea, but most of the stuff thepiratebay has attempted has
never really materialized into anything

See: Buying a island / Baywords / The Video Bay

------
softbuilder
<http://server-sky.com/>

------
jcfrei
great, instead of hiding those proxies in some random apartment complex with a
fibre optic connection, you're putting them up in the sky for all to see - I
doubt this post is serious. and btw. what about the ground receivers? your
local law enforcer can take those down pretty easily and I imagine if you're
gonna send 100Mbps thru the air, somebody's gonna pick up on that pretty
easily.

if I was piratebay, I'd rent a cheap appartment somewhere in downtown zurich
(switzerland is unlikely to take down filehosters (rapidshare is located here
as well)), get one of those cheap fibre optics connections (check under:
[http://www.stadt-
zuerich.ch/content/ewz/de/index/telecom/ewz...](http://www.stadt-
zuerich.ch/content/ewz/de/index/telecom/ewz_zuerinet/verfuegbarkeit_pruefen.html)
) and install your servers in there. you get 100 mbps up for about 200$ a
month. admitted it's still an expensive setup, but that would be some reliable
hosting.

~~~
codesuela
Rapidshares servers are in Germany though. And they've been sued (and won) in
German courts. They are only incorporated in Switzerland. Not to mention that
Swiss server bandwidth is relatively expensive, see eg
[http://www.softronics.ch/en/products/linux-dedicated-
server....](http://www.softronics.ch/en/products/linux-dedicated-server.php)

------
jacquesm
Good luck with that. Really, the only airspace they'll be able to fly in will
be that of the sovereign nations they'll be overflying. Unrestricted typically
means < 300 meters (the altitude that you can fly a model aircraft in). Flying
a drone definitely != low orbit.

Way to go to get a lot of press but (ahem) this will never fly.

------
whalesalad
I think it would be way cooler to have something float in international waters
and use tidal/wave power to keep running. I guess that would be a lot easier
to mess around with though.

~~~
HNatWORK
The pirates would become the pirated. Sorry I couldn't help myself.

------
JoeAltmaier
Servers are the new power-hogs. Go one step further: put servers on actual
satellites, using solar power. Endlessly scalable, free power, at the cost of
some milliseconds of lag.

~~~
bcbrown
I doubt the "free power" would be enough to compensate for the energy cost of
getting a dedicated server satellite into space, plus the construction cost of
building the satellite, plus the increased power cost of communicating with
it.

~~~
ImprovedSilence
Perhaps true. But at least you wouldn't have the huge cost of cooling things
down. Just imagine the possibilities, especially if/when SSD's catch up to
HDD's in capacity/price.

~~~
Lennie
You only need a tracker in space, nothing more.

Not sure what the disk usage is of the tracker though. I would guess it all
fits in memory ?

------
lsiebert
There are a variety of issues with airborne servers. It's hard to keep things
in the air for long periods, and it's harder at low heights. Higher up, you
can avoid a lot of weather issues, winds tend to be predictable etc.

Satellites mean big latency. Boats have supply issues. Sealand is apparently a
bust. Frankly, if you want a data haven, do something similar Cryptonomicon
talked about. Though that too has some issues, especially given how undersea
cables work.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
I don't think latency is that big of a concern. First, these are behind their
global proxies. Second, this is all meta-data, so if it takes a second longer
to load the magnet link and associated text, meh.

Some of the combination flying wings are getting pretty good flight time (2+
weeks[1]). It isn't an unreasonable direction to start looking, especially if
you could use that time to hop from one base to another around the world.

1\. [http://www.suasnews.com/2011/06/5837/zephyr-the-new-
standard...](http://www.suasnews.com/2011/06/5837/zephyr-the-new-standard-for-
unmanned-aerial-vehicles/)

------
DrCatbox
The proposed system still has a very weak point, the drone-controll-station
and land/take off spots. The government or the MAFIAA will simply intercept
the drones on takeoff/landing. Wasnt it in the USA where a law was passed a
few months ago to prohibit civil drones in the air, or at least "regulate"
drone-flying? Sending stuff up in the air will be a crime.

~~~
lwat
With some helium and a few solar cells they can stay in the air until they
fail. No need to land them.

~~~
mistercow
Helium is actually pretty much impossible to contain over long periods of
time. That's why running out and buying helium tanks isn't a smart investment,
even though it's currently being sold at far below its longterm value; by the
time everyone runs out of helium, yours will have leaked away.

Of course, in a thin, light vessel suitable for flight, the helium is going to
escape much more quickly.

I do not know if this would be an issue for a hydrogen balloon.

~~~
learc83
You can remove hydrogen from water very easily, so refilling it would be easy.
Plus, hydrogen is lighter than helium.

~~~
solarian
It's a potential perpetual motion machine...

Good enough solar cells, good enough membrane, good enough lightweight HHO,
and a way to capture moisture from the air itself in the form on condensation
or dew. It could be a small thing of water... whoa...

Build IT!!!

~~~
nick_urban
That would be an incredible, sci-fi level achievement, but it would not be a
"perpetual motion machine" in the common sense, because it would derive its
power from the sun rather than producing it internally.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion>

~~~
solarian
It could work if you uses a Super Hydropholic membrane around the outer
hull... Links on the subject:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_hydrophilicity>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superhydrophobicity>

It could just collect water into it, and using natural gravity it would
accumulate @ the bottom where you could then, simply collect/filter it, and
use it to run a HHO generator which who essentially fill the
aircraft/dirigible, and power it, simultaneously...

Collecting water from the air itself...

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troposphere>

Program the damn thing to track weather patterns, along with the usual air-
pressure & humidity patterns.

You could essentially, fly through clouds to absorb the water, or just keep
flying within specific patterns along with the humidity patterns of the EARTH.

If you wanted to do it the cheap hacker-way, and small scale...

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7uGJGvo9w&feature=rela...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7uGJGvo9w&feature=related)

<http://hackaday.com/2007/12/27/24c3-build-your-own-uav/>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rain-X>

A small jar HHO generator which would then feed a micro-engine(like in a R/C
car) powering an electrical generator which would feed power to the HHO
generator. This is already being done commercially.

Solar is a way better way then combustion in the end but, its the closest
thing to a TYPE-2 civilization WE will see...

;-)

~~~
burgerbrain
> _"A small jar HHO generator which would then feed a micro-engine(like in a
> R/C car) powering an electrical generator which would feed power to the HHO
> generator."_

Wait, so you split water and burn it in a generator to generate the power
you're using to split the water? I would _love_ to see someone work out the
math on that one... Everything I know about chemistry suggests that the best
you'll ever do is 100% efficiency, which you of course cannot hit if you're
not burning all of your H2 (which you wouldn't be, since the point is to get
H2 to lift the whole thing).

 _"This is already being done commercially."_

Do you have an example?

------
savramescu
But disabling the radio system that's on earth wouldn't it be the same as
disabling the servers?

------
ivix
TPB could easily encourage its users to use a truly decentralised model. Given
that TPB is effectively simply serving small magnet links of a few bytes in
length, this would actually be extremely easy.

But of course then they would have made themselves irrelevant.

------
Geee
What do they mean by 'modern radio transmitters'? Are they planning to use
open Wi-Fis or LTE networks or use something else that I'm not aware of? Is
there some off-the-self tech available for this kind of thing?

------
cowkingdeluxe
This not feasible for two reasons (and many more). Lipo batteries won't last
long enough for it to make sense. Carrying server equipment is also not
feasible and further reduces battery / gas life.

------
dps
Someone hit "publish" on the April Fools post instead of "save as draft".

------
mrinterweb
I was just thinking of the possibilities of building a high altitude wireless
network to serve rural communities. It almost seems uncanny that I find this
same article pop up today.

------
barrynolan
Would you believe, my Irish ISP blocks piratebay access.

~~~
Luyt
Same here, _both_ my providers Xs4all and Ziggo were ordered by a Dutch judge
to block thepiratebay.org, an initiative of MPAA sockpuppet 'BREIN
foundation'. See <http://www.xs4all.nl/geblokkeerd/>

I know that it can be easily circumvented, but this shouldn't be necessary.
These censoring attempts should stop.

------
bicknergseng
I'm doing something similar with an RC airplane I'm building. Streams live
video feeds from 3 cameras via CDMA. Flight Simulator be damned.

------
dawsdesign
I love the idea and I was actually thinking of doing something similar myself.

Any drones under 400ft and don't leave line of sight of the operator are
legal.d

------
noonespecial
I hope that actual smart people aren't really working on this. It used to be
that this kind of crazy ambition was what started the best companies. Its an
almost Apple-ish goal from yesteryear. If this generation's Wozs spend their
efforts simply trying to thwart dumb government, I think society will be
poorer for it, even if they can watch all of the free movies they want over
the blimp.

~~~
nextparadigms
Actually, Woz did do stuff like this in the past. He used to hack the phone
lines to get free calls, and other stuff like that:

[http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/168957,rsa-2010-woz-
revea...](http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/168957,rsa-2010-woz-reveals-his-
hacking-history.aspx)

~~~
CamperBob
As their first business venture together, he and Jobs sold blue boxes.

So, the irony level that was reached when Jobs ordered the creation of a
locked-down cell phone platform wrapped clear around 2^32-1 and back to zero.

------
mmaunder
Talk is cheap.

------
ChrisMorrisCo
So... what if a bird flies into it?

~~~
tbsdy
The bird becomes a Tor endpoint, using RFC 1149.

~~~
sozen
You just made my day.

------
monsterix
This seems more like a silver lining to open sourcing space vehicles industry.
Very recently I saw this: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvDqoxMUroA> which
is an inexpensive hack to reach over (I mean as compared to what tax-payers
shell out) 120,000 meters. That's real space! Much beyond the scope of
corruption, but evidently an easy frontier to become a junkyard if greed and
dumbness (read SOPA/PIPA & Govies) continue on the path of destruction.

------
Porter_423
Even if there IS a better way of doing it on the ground, this is a GREAT way
to embarrass the ones who are trying to shut you down.An Aeroplane or
helicopter needed just to shut down a floating computer?

------
grimatongueworm
Let's hope the 'Bay doesn't accidentally take out a 747.

~~~
jrockway
Let's hope that 747s aren't flying around randomly in uncontrolled airspace.

------
javery
Let's see - a foreign object positioned above the United States in a low
orbit.... pretty sure that will get shot down.

~~~
bdunbar
A few kilometers up is not orbit.

And .. foreign satellites go overhead all the time. That's how orbit _works_.

~~~
prophetjohn
It's also trivial to place an object into orbit at a speed such that it stays
in the same place relative to Earth. So a given satellite in orbit does not
necessarily need to pass over the United States. This is why you have to get
on your roof and point the dish at some magical place in the sky. You're
pointing it at the satellite

~~~
bdunbar
Given the cost of sending missions to GEO, the time involved to put anything
into orbit, how tedious and pesky rockets are, you have a funny definition of
'trivial'.

~~~
prophetjohn
I'm referring to the difference in difficulty among putting a satellite into
non-geosynchronous orbit and putting a satellite into geosynchronous orbit.

