You’ve probably noticed that every “revolutionary” tech project today promises to decentralize the web. We are constantly sold the fantasy of escaping corporate ISPs and state surveillance. But what if the real bottleneck to digital freedom isn’t a lack of engineering, but a hundred-year-old law?
Enter HERMES. Built by the team at Rhizomatica, HERMES isn’t trying to be the next Starlink, and it isn’t trying to replace the internet. It is a modernized, digital shortwave radio system that bounces voice and data off the Earth’s ionosphere, allowing anyone to communicate across continents without a single cell tower, fiber optic cable, or corporate server in between.
The future of decentralized communication isn’t being built in Silicon Valley; it’s being fought over on radio frequencies we abandoned a century ago.
Here is the twist: the technology works beautifully. Running at about 3 kilobits per second, it won’t stream your Netflix, but it will effortlessly route secure emails and text data across the globe. In an era of constant blackouts, surveillance, and infrastructure decay, it represents the ultimate pull toward self-reliance. Anyone, anywhere, could communicate without permission.
But there is a massive problem. HERMES uses encryption.
In the United States and many other countries, amateur radio bands are strictly regulated by legacy frameworks that treat broadcasting as inherently public. The rules are clear: if you transmit on these frequencies, anyone must be able to listen. The law demands absolute transparency. By integrating modern cryptographic tools to protect user privacy, HERMES collides head-on with a 20th-century regulatory regime designed for an era of open, tinkerer-driven radio.
You cannot promise resilient, independent communication while simultaneously demanding the government be allowed to read every word you transmit.
This is the fundamental clash that most technologists miss. The real innovation of HERMES isn’t the radio link itself—it’s the audacity to force a 21st-century privacy debate onto a spectrum regime that was designed for 20th-century openness. The bottleneck isn’t physics; it’s policy.
Regulators argue that encryption on amateur bands violates the spirit of the service. They claim it could be used to obscure illegal or malicious activity. But this is the exact same argument used to fight end-to-end encryption on the modern internet. It is a fear of what happens when the public gains the ability to communicate without oversight.
We are told to trust the infrastructure. We are told to trust the companies that manage the cables. But as we’ve seen time and again, that trust is routinely violated. The pushback against HERMES isn’t about protecting the airwaves; it’s about maintaining a monopoly on control.
When the grid goes down, your encrypted apps and satellite dishes become paperweights. The only thing left communicating will be the ionosphere.
HERMES exposes a truth the telecom industry doesn’t want you to realize: the infrastructure for global, resilient, decentralized communication already exists. It has existed since the dawn of radio. The only thing standing in the way is a legal system terrified of a world where people can speak freely, across oceans, without asking for a license.
We don’t need a faster internet. We need a resilient one. The technology is ready. The only question is whether the law will let us use it.
FAQ
Q: Isn't 3 kilobits per second too slow to be useful?
A: Not at all. While it won't stream video, 3 kbps is more than enough for secure, encrypted text messages and emails. In a disaster scenario where cellular and internet infrastructure is completely destroyed, the ability to send a text message across the globe is infinitely more valuable than a 5G connection that doesn't exist.
Q: Why is encryption illegal on amateur radio frequencies?
A: Because 20th-century regulations designed the amateur spectrum as a public commons. The rules mandate that transmissions must be transparent and decodable by anyone listening. The government views encrypted broadcasts on these bands as a violation of the public, open nature of the service, effectively outlawing private communication over public airwaves.
Q: If the government bans it, doesn't that mean it's dangerous?
A: It means it's dangerous to centralized control. The ban on encryption in amateur radio isn't about public safety; it's about ensuring the state can always monitor grassroots communications. HERMES forces the issue: if you have a right to private conversation in your living room, you should have a right to private conversation over the airwaves.