DIYISP second PC revolution

The first PC revolution happened when ordinary people could afford a computer on their desks. The web, and especially web 2.0, has revived the mainframe era, in that software is outside our reach and our data reside on machines owned and operated by someone else.

I don't want my ISP, or the US government, or Google, or anybody to censor my Internet access or unplug it. I'm willing to let them see my data, but I don't want them confiscating it, and I sympathize with those, especially in other countries, who fear that their government will punish them for their political opinions. Even in the US, ISPs, cell phone providers, and web 2.0 style social networking services may reveal my email to government agents without proper authorization, or be "socially engineered" by crooks. Their logs reveal what I read, what I write, and when I am reading and writing it.

In a previous post, I briefly described my vision of a DIY ISP (http://brimpossible.blogspot.com/2012/10/diyisp.html?m=0). Ideally, my home computers would hide behind a home firewall, showing nothing but constant encrypted noise to my ISP. The firewall would generate some random packets to defeat traffic analysis. Outgoing connections would utilize the TOR network or some similar darknet to obscure the content and destination of my attention. I would use my ISP's email and web services only for innocuous tasks, or not at all.

What are the threats and responses? If a disaster disconnects my ISP, a mesh net should take its place. If a corporation deletes my data, I should restore from a backup. If a government seeks to track or censor my consumption or production of ideas, I should hide using steganography and cryptography. How to resist a web takedown?

In reality, I have taken the opposite approach, radical openness and radical laziness.

Would anyone buy a cable router that accomplished all this, or a home firewall? Would the government treat my odd behavior as a red flag and search for excuses to raid my house?
Could I protect my data from seizure? I could store it primarily offsite, encrypted, on a non-shared virtual server hosted in a different country.

How often will this break down? What will be the consequences of breakage?

Limits of Radical Transparency

Where does radical transparency fail? Even an extreme proponent of openness needs a bank account, a social security number, a sex life. In most areas of my life, I think I would welcome radical transparency, if it applied to everyone, not just to me. I can see yours, you can see mine. But if I can see all your bank information, I could withdraw all your money. If I know your credit card numbers, I can use them to buy stuff. If I know all your personal information, I could borrow money in your name. And although my sex life would make the most boring porn ever, that doesn't mean I want it out there.

I'm not sure how David Brin answers this question. He wrote the book on this (The Transparent Society), in which he pointed to the basic problem. Cameras keep getting smaller, smarter, more mobile. People want to use them, and some people will use them even if this usage breaks the rules. Brin thinks privacy is done for, that our only choice is, does everyone get to do this, or shall we reserve it for the rich, powerful, and unscrupulous?

Assume Brin got it right. Where does that leave us?