I’ve been Internet user for a long time. I used privacy tools like VPNs, tor etc. But after the long years using the internet I realized privacy tools are not worth it because VPNs cost money and tor network has its shortcomings.
My question is, are there technologies that replaces the Internet where users can share and have access to information?
There’s improved protocols that give you high speeds and more privacy, you might look into OHTTP. Big things coming in the future, I don’t think the internet is being replaced but things like QUIC adoption will make it a while lot faster.
The only way to replace the internet is to simply get off the computer and put the phones down. Something I seriously doubt anyone under 30 has EVER done, lol. In short there is no technology but no technology to replace the internet. So unless you plan on going full Kaczynski there is no solution. And even if you did decide to live “off grid” that’s not exactly a alternative to the internet. It’s more like anti-sharing information, because you’ve cut yourself completely out of the loop. In an imperfect world with imperfect tech the best imperfect solution is encryption. Anything that you don’t want unauthorized personnel to see should be encrypted. When you want to talk with your friends, convince them to use Signal instead of standard SMS. When you want to exchange top-secret messages with someone else use PGP instead of insecure stuff like SMTP. When you’re concerned about physical access to your data, use full disk encryption. If you do a lot of work with remote computing always use SSH and NEVER use insecure protocols like telnet.
I agree on what you said that encryption might solve some problems. But what about truth. The Internet is accessible to the public and anyone can write a blog, post video on Youtube, tweet on Twitter. This information maybe inaccurate, misleading, or deliberately false and can spread rapidly. Without critical thinking and careful evaluation of sources, users risk accepting and sharing dubious information, which can contribute to the erosion of informed discourse and public trust. In conclusion, the exploration of alternative networks is for the good of those seeking more privacy and credibility.
They’ll likely be disinformation and misinformation no matter what alternative ‘network’ you explore. Not to mention the innate confirmation bias that exists within us all. First you need to ask yourself what information are you receiving and what is it about? Then you need to determine is this information objectively false or is it simply something you don’t agree with. Few information in this world can be summed up in objective truth. Most is subjective “truths” we arrive at through what we hope is rational thought and discourse, but there’s also bias confirmation based on preconceived notions, supported references, and the unrestrained willingness to omit unsupported references. The blogger or youtuber you don’t like may be just that…you don’t like them. And whatever truth and reality is may just be skewed by your own beliefs. What I know to be an objective truth is anyone can start a blog or post a youtube video. With the barrier of entry that low, anyone’s voice can be heard in a relatively free way (only requirement is basic access to internet). You absolutely WILL hear views that you disagree with, and perhaps some that even make you cringe. But if this network was suddenly taken away, the next network to replace it may not be as opened and democratic as this one. Disinformation becomes far more dangerous in this scenario because you exist in a sandbox with it having no place to escape. I think the biggest danger with the current information stream model is the lack of meaningful discourse. Particularly with things like culture and politics. “Discourse” now days on social media usually means little more than finding groups of people who already agree with you and getting them to tell you how right you are.