Mixing
Is there any evidence of a secret level of deeply-hidden web-pages called “Marianas Web�
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
11
down vote
favorite
There is a rumour that there is an Internet-based network, similar to the dark web (not to be confused with the deep web) called Mariana's Web (after Marianas Trench.)
The Infographics Show discussed the rumours of its existence:
Marianas web the scariest part of the Internet. Marianas web became widely
known because of an iceberg infographic that spread across the Internet. This
infographic divides the internet into different levels ranging from level zero
or the common web that most of us are familiar with to several other hidden
levels. Marianas web is identified as level 5 - the most hidden level of the
internet.
[...]
there is no concrete evidence that clearly proves or disproves its existence
This (machine-translated English, from Portugese via Spanish) Softonic article gives credence to its existence, while dismissing some of the fictitious software required to reach it:
In the fifth layer we would find the so-called Web Marianas. The Mariana Trench, known as the deepest place in the oceans of Planet Earth, may have inspired the name.
In a popular infographic that goes around the internet, in this part of the Deep Web begin with speculations about the use of a tool called "Closed Shell Systems" (closed systems), in addition to another called "Polymeric Falcighol Derivation" (Falcighol Polymer Derivation) ).
All this, however, would be fictitious names and tools, created from nothing. Only some curious new users end up believing them. Leaving the jokes aside, however, it is well known that several websites need programs and settings much more advanced than Tor to be accessed.
These sites are what would form the so-called Marianas Web.
This Engadget article dismisses it as a myth:
Mariana's Web is certainly the definition of spooky BS, especially because it's technically impossible; it's supposedly only accessible through quantum computers -- which currently only exist in science fiction.
Yet to the chagrin of people who love facts, it's slowly starting to be reported as fact.
A question on Quora has received conflicting answers.
Is there any evidence of a network beyond the dark web, called Marianas Web?
internet
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
down vote
favorite
There is a rumour that there is an Internet-based network, similar to the dark web (not to be confused with the deep web) called Mariana's Web (after Marianas Trench.)
The Infographics Show discussed the rumours of its existence:
Marianas web the scariest part of the Internet. Marianas web became widely
known because of an iceberg infographic that spread across the Internet. This
infographic divides the internet into different levels ranging from level zero
or the common web that most of us are familiar with to several other hidden
levels. Marianas web is identified as level 5 - the most hidden level of the
internet.
[...]
there is no concrete evidence that clearly proves or disproves its existence
This (machine-translated English, from Portugese via Spanish) Softonic article gives credence to its existence, while dismissing some of the fictitious software required to reach it:
In the fifth layer we would find the so-called Web Marianas. The Mariana Trench, known as the deepest place in the oceans of Planet Earth, may have inspired the name.
In a popular infographic that goes around the internet, in this part of the Deep Web begin with speculations about the use of a tool called "Closed Shell Systems" (closed systems), in addition to another called "Polymeric Falcighol Derivation" (Falcighol Polymer Derivation) ).
All this, however, would be fictitious names and tools, created from nothing. Only some curious new users end up believing them. Leaving the jokes aside, however, it is well known that several websites need programs and settings much more advanced than Tor to be accessed.
These sites are what would form the so-called Marianas Web.
This Engadget article dismisses it as a myth:
Mariana's Web is certainly the definition of spooky BS, especially because it's technically impossible; it's supposedly only accessible through quantum computers -- which currently only exist in science fiction.
Yet to the chagrin of people who love facts, it's slowly starting to be reported as fact.
A question on Quora has received conflicting answers.
Is there any evidence of a network beyond the dark web, called Marianas Web?
internet
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
3
It's going to be very difficult to provide any answer other than "we don't know"... to say "No there's not" would require proving a negative! I think the question as worded "Is there any evidence..." is much more answerable.
– elliot svensson
4 hours ago
I feel like this is going to be like trying to prove that aliens aren't being stored in Area 51. If there's no evidence for something that's supposedly real and well hidden, people will just use that lack of evidence as proof that it's real and well hidden.
– Giter
4 hours ago
2
When you're treating an image from 4chan that's obviously a joke as evidence of a rumor, it must be a truly slow week.
– IllusiveBrian
4 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
down vote
favorite
up vote
11
down vote
favorite
There is a rumour that there is an Internet-based network, similar to the dark web (not to be confused with the deep web) called Mariana's Web (after Marianas Trench.)
The Infographics Show discussed the rumours of its existence:
Marianas web the scariest part of the Internet. Marianas web became widely
known because of an iceberg infographic that spread across the Internet. This
infographic divides the internet into different levels ranging from level zero
or the common web that most of us are familiar with to several other hidden
levels. Marianas web is identified as level 5 - the most hidden level of the
internet.
[...]
there is no concrete evidence that clearly proves or disproves its existence
This (machine-translated English, from Portugese via Spanish) Softonic article gives credence to its existence, while dismissing some of the fictitious software required to reach it:
In the fifth layer we would find the so-called Web Marianas. The Mariana Trench, known as the deepest place in the oceans of Planet Earth, may have inspired the name.
In a popular infographic that goes around the internet, in this part of the Deep Web begin with speculations about the use of a tool called "Closed Shell Systems" (closed systems), in addition to another called "Polymeric Falcighol Derivation" (Falcighol Polymer Derivation) ).
All this, however, would be fictitious names and tools, created from nothing. Only some curious new users end up believing them. Leaving the jokes aside, however, it is well known that several websites need programs and settings much more advanced than Tor to be accessed.
These sites are what would form the so-called Marianas Web.
This Engadget article dismisses it as a myth:
Mariana's Web is certainly the definition of spooky BS, especially because it's technically impossible; it's supposedly only accessible through quantum computers -- which currently only exist in science fiction.
Yet to the chagrin of people who love facts, it's slowly starting to be reported as fact.
A question on Quora has received conflicting answers.
Is there any evidence of a network beyond the dark web, called Marianas Web?
internet
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
There is a rumour that there is an Internet-based network, similar to the dark web (not to be confused with the deep web) called Mariana's Web (after Marianas Trench.)
The Infographics Show discussed the rumours of its existence:
Marianas web the scariest part of the Internet. Marianas web became widely
known because of an iceberg infographic that spread across the Internet. This
infographic divides the internet into different levels ranging from level zero
or the common web that most of us are familiar with to several other hidden
levels. Marianas web is identified as level 5 - the most hidden level of the
internet.
[...]
there is no concrete evidence that clearly proves or disproves its existence
This (machine-translated English, from Portugese via Spanish) Softonic article gives credence to its existence, while dismissing some of the fictitious software required to reach it:
In the fifth layer we would find the so-called Web Marianas. The Mariana Trench, known as the deepest place in the oceans of Planet Earth, may have inspired the name.
In a popular infographic that goes around the internet, in this part of the Deep Web begin with speculations about the use of a tool called "Closed Shell Systems" (closed systems), in addition to another called "Polymeric Falcighol Derivation" (Falcighol Polymer Derivation) ).
All this, however, would be fictitious names and tools, created from nothing. Only some curious new users end up believing them. Leaving the jokes aside, however, it is well known that several websites need programs and settings much more advanced than Tor to be accessed.
These sites are what would form the so-called Marianas Web.
This Engadget article dismisses it as a myth:
Mariana's Web is certainly the definition of spooky BS, especially because it's technically impossible; it's supposedly only accessible through quantum computers -- which currently only exist in science fiction.
Yet to the chagrin of people who love facts, it's slowly starting to be reported as fact.
A question on Quora has received conflicting answers.
Is there any evidence of a network beyond the dark web, called Marianas Web?
internet
internet
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
edited 11 mins ago
elliot svensson
1,167326
1,167326
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
asked 6 hours ago
user2638180
526159
526159
3
It's going to be very difficult to provide any answer other than "we don't know"... to say "No there's not" would require proving a negative! I think the question as worded "Is there any evidence..." is much more answerable.
– elliot svensson
4 hours ago
I feel like this is going to be like trying to prove that aliens aren't being stored in Area 51. If there's no evidence for something that's supposedly real and well hidden, people will just use that lack of evidence as proof that it's real and well hidden.
– Giter
4 hours ago
2
When you're treating an image from 4chan that's obviously a joke as evidence of a rumor, it must be a truly slow week.
– IllusiveBrian
4 hours ago
add a comment |Â
3
It's going to be very difficult to provide any answer other than "we don't know"... to say "No there's not" would require proving a negative! I think the question as worded "Is there any evidence..." is much more answerable.
– elliot svensson
4 hours ago
I feel like this is going to be like trying to prove that aliens aren't being stored in Area 51. If there's no evidence for something that's supposedly real and well hidden, people will just use that lack of evidence as proof that it's real and well hidden.
– Giter
4 hours ago
2
When you're treating an image from 4chan that's obviously a joke as evidence of a rumor, it must be a truly slow week.
– IllusiveBrian
4 hours ago
3
3
It's going to be very difficult to provide any answer other than "we don't know"... to say "No there's not" would require proving a negative! I think the question as worded "Is there any evidence..." is much more answerable.
– elliot svensson
4 hours ago
It's going to be very difficult to provide any answer other than "we don't know"... to say "No there's not" would require proving a negative! I think the question as worded "Is there any evidence..." is much more answerable.
– elliot svensson
4 hours ago
I feel like this is going to be like trying to prove that aliens aren't being stored in Area 51. If there's no evidence for something that's supposedly real and well hidden, people will just use that lack of evidence as proof that it's real and well hidden.
– Giter
4 hours ago
I feel like this is going to be like trying to prove that aliens aren't being stored in Area 51. If there's no evidence for something that's supposedly real and well hidden, people will just use that lack of evidence as proof that it's real and well hidden.
– Giter
4 hours ago
2
2
When you're treating an image from 4chan that's obviously a joke as evidence of a rumor, it must be a truly slow week.
– IllusiveBrian
4 hours ago
When you're treating an image from 4chan that's obviously a joke as evidence of a rumor, it must be a truly slow week.
– IllusiveBrian
4 hours ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
20
down vote
NO, it's a 4chan urban legend
"Marianas web" is an expression originating from an infographic first published on 4chan in 2011-early 2012 that attempted to provide a classification of the deep web architecture.
According to this infographic, the web is divided in 5 layers, each more difficult to access, and the deepest is supposed to be "Marianas web"
First of all, it should be noted that the layers chosen are extremely arbitrary, and by no mean is that classification backed by any relevant authorities.
Then, reading the description of the 5th layer shows you need "Polymeric falcighol derivation", described as such :
Shit… I don't really know *****. All I know is that you need to solve quantum mechanics in order to view this on even the normal web, let alone closed servers. Quantum Computation exists, and the government powers have them. So be careful what you do here.
In addition to the fact that the whole "Polymeric falcighol derivation" term is purely made up, Quantum Computing is a very experimental field with no real-world application as of now (let alone in 2012). I believe the existence of "Marianas Web" can thus be dismissed.
According to RationalWiki, the graph was expanded in 2014 where three new levels were added. I'll leave it to you to decide whether those are credible or not.
Sources :
To be honest, explicitly dating an internet phenomenon is quite hard. The earliest source I've found for the infographic dates back to September 2011, and Polymeric falcighol derivation yields only 5000 results, mostly related to deep web topics originating from reddit, quora, or alt-science blogs. Similarly, google trends show a beginning of the trend around October 2011 with a peak in may 2014
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
2
How do you know if was first published on 4chan? How do you know "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is purely made up? I don't see how this is a stronger answer than the refutations the OP has already cited.
– Oddthinking♦
5 hours ago
9
@Oddthinking, the onus is one someone to prove that those things exist, not on anybody else to disprove them. The latter is quite impossible. This is a common scheme with such theories - they are not easily amenable to the scientific method of proof or disproof. Hence, as long as there are no significant details that actually do point to their existence (and no, 4chan topics or Quora questions, or even Stackexchange answers are not significant for that).
– AnoE
4 hours ago
7
@DavidRicherby I dunno, that's pretty much what I'd say to anyone who asked me if Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster were real, and I'd absolutely consider that a satisfactory response. The claim is of dubious origin with sketchy details, which is not airtight evidence, but at least suggests its falsehood. How could anyone prove the nonexistence of something?
– Nuclear Wang
3 hours ago
1
The normal skeptical position is that the burden of proof is on the claimant. However, by necessity of the format of the site ("I heard a weird claim. Is it true?") the burden is reversed here; it is put on the answerer. Either way, you are making positive claims: that 4chan was the first to publish it, and "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is made-up, so you need references to support that.
– Oddthinking♦
59 mins ago
1
Arguing that no computer science algorithm would be named after polymers is an argument from personal incredulity. Bozosort is an algorithm. Hairy Ball is a theorem. Bananaman is a type of topological space. Rainbow tables are a data structure. Stable Marriage is a problem.
– Oddthinking♦
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
By the definition of the infographic, it sort of does exist.
Following the definitions of the infographic, the 'Marianas Web' is something that you need a
- Closed shell system; and
- Polymeric Falcighol Derivation
to access. Lets, for a moment, just pretend that Polymeric Falcighol Derivation just means 'heavy encryption' (of a ... real ... type) and you are basically describing a 'National Asset' information system.
The United States has them, China has them, NATO has them, Five Eyes has them. I would assume most of the larger nations in the world have them. Some of these systems are small, some are large, some are mutually compatible with others; but none of them are physically connected to the outside internet. The concept of operation is just a separate WAN with entirely separate physical infrastructure: routers, DNS servers, underwater cables or satellites, etc.
The most commonly known of these networks would be SIPRnet, which is an internet-like structure used by the US Department of Defense and is classified Secret. Most people who served in the US Military would be familiar with this system, which is identical to the regular internet from the user's perceptive (there are security-related differences in the transport layer).
Now, I imagine these networks have lots of interesting information on them, like minutes from diplomatic conferences, drawings of nuclear bombs and the current location of warplanes; but, obviously, you won't be finding most of the stuff attributed on that silly infographic.
While these networks are certainly hard to hack; and can't be accessed remotely like the infamous Swordfish hacking scene, you can still get in, just by using the oldest trick in the book: bribe or otherwise compromise someone who has access.
So in some sense, this mythical network does exist.
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Please provide some references to support your claims - e.g. what a National Asset Information System is, and that the US, China, NATO and Five Eyes have one.
– Oddthinking♦
48 mins ago
This is a rather peculiar argument. "Yes there is a network on the Internet called Marianas Web that requires special protocols to access, except that it isn't on the Internet, and it isn't called Marianas Web and doesn't require any special protocols to access. It is just a private network."
– Oddthinking♦
45 mins ago
@Oddthinking - I was just going to post a satirical answer/comment about how I have one (it's a disconnected/turned off computer in my locked basement). BUT Poe's law strikes again.
– user5341
9 mins ago
@Oddthinking This might be more of a note for the OP, but they mention SIPRnet which is a NAIS. JWICS is another example that is used in the US. CRONOS is what NATO uses. However, the gist of them is that they are using encrypted communications protocols that may or may not be transmitted over the broader internet. Accessing them usually requires having the appropriate equipment (ex., Motorola gear) as well as the appropriate cryptographic keys.
– rjzii
3 mins ago
@Oddthinking While I think information is born to be free, but I also am not interested in going to jail. In addition to the content of some of these networks being classified, the existence of such networks is also sometimes classified. The easily verifiable example is SIPRnet, which is referenced, and shares enough characteristics with the 'Marianas Web' that I thought it was worth noting. A wikipedia entry should be sufficient to demonstrate that SIPRnet exists and that it has the ascribed properties.
– kingledion
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
20
down vote
NO, it's a 4chan urban legend
"Marianas web" is an expression originating from an infographic first published on 4chan in 2011-early 2012 that attempted to provide a classification of the deep web architecture.
According to this infographic, the web is divided in 5 layers, each more difficult to access, and the deepest is supposed to be "Marianas web"
First of all, it should be noted that the layers chosen are extremely arbitrary, and by no mean is that classification backed by any relevant authorities.
Then, reading the description of the 5th layer shows you need "Polymeric falcighol derivation", described as such :
Shit… I don't really know *****. All I know is that you need to solve quantum mechanics in order to view this on even the normal web, let alone closed servers. Quantum Computation exists, and the government powers have them. So be careful what you do here.
In addition to the fact that the whole "Polymeric falcighol derivation" term is purely made up, Quantum Computing is a very experimental field with no real-world application as of now (let alone in 2012). I believe the existence of "Marianas Web" can thus be dismissed.
According to RationalWiki, the graph was expanded in 2014 where three new levels were added. I'll leave it to you to decide whether those are credible or not.
Sources :
To be honest, explicitly dating an internet phenomenon is quite hard. The earliest source I've found for the infographic dates back to September 2011, and Polymeric falcighol derivation yields only 5000 results, mostly related to deep web topics originating from reddit, quora, or alt-science blogs. Similarly, google trends show a beginning of the trend around October 2011 with a peak in may 2014
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
2
How do you know if was first published on 4chan? How do you know "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is purely made up? I don't see how this is a stronger answer than the refutations the OP has already cited.
– Oddthinking♦
5 hours ago
9
@Oddthinking, the onus is one someone to prove that those things exist, not on anybody else to disprove them. The latter is quite impossible. This is a common scheme with such theories - they are not easily amenable to the scientific method of proof or disproof. Hence, as long as there are no significant details that actually do point to their existence (and no, 4chan topics or Quora questions, or even Stackexchange answers are not significant for that).
– AnoE
4 hours ago
7
@DavidRicherby I dunno, that's pretty much what I'd say to anyone who asked me if Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster were real, and I'd absolutely consider that a satisfactory response. The claim is of dubious origin with sketchy details, which is not airtight evidence, but at least suggests its falsehood. How could anyone prove the nonexistence of something?
– Nuclear Wang
3 hours ago
1
The normal skeptical position is that the burden of proof is on the claimant. However, by necessity of the format of the site ("I heard a weird claim. Is it true?") the burden is reversed here; it is put on the answerer. Either way, you are making positive claims: that 4chan was the first to publish it, and "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is made-up, so you need references to support that.
– Oddthinking♦
59 mins ago
1
Arguing that no computer science algorithm would be named after polymers is an argument from personal incredulity. Bozosort is an algorithm. Hairy Ball is a theorem. Bananaman is a type of topological space. Rainbow tables are a data structure. Stable Marriage is a problem.
– Oddthinking♦
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
20
down vote
NO, it's a 4chan urban legend
"Marianas web" is an expression originating from an infographic first published on 4chan in 2011-early 2012 that attempted to provide a classification of the deep web architecture.
According to this infographic, the web is divided in 5 layers, each more difficult to access, and the deepest is supposed to be "Marianas web"
First of all, it should be noted that the layers chosen are extremely arbitrary, and by no mean is that classification backed by any relevant authorities.
Then, reading the description of the 5th layer shows you need "Polymeric falcighol derivation", described as such :
Shit… I don't really know *****. All I know is that you need to solve quantum mechanics in order to view this on even the normal web, let alone closed servers. Quantum Computation exists, and the government powers have them. So be careful what you do here.
In addition to the fact that the whole "Polymeric falcighol derivation" term is purely made up, Quantum Computing is a very experimental field with no real-world application as of now (let alone in 2012). I believe the existence of "Marianas Web" can thus be dismissed.
According to RationalWiki, the graph was expanded in 2014 where three new levels were added. I'll leave it to you to decide whether those are credible or not.
Sources :
To be honest, explicitly dating an internet phenomenon is quite hard. The earliest source I've found for the infographic dates back to September 2011, and Polymeric falcighol derivation yields only 5000 results, mostly related to deep web topics originating from reddit, quora, or alt-science blogs. Similarly, google trends show a beginning of the trend around October 2011 with a peak in may 2014
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
2
How do you know if was first published on 4chan? How do you know "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is purely made up? I don't see how this is a stronger answer than the refutations the OP has already cited.
– Oddthinking♦
5 hours ago
9
@Oddthinking, the onus is one someone to prove that those things exist, not on anybody else to disprove them. The latter is quite impossible. This is a common scheme with such theories - they are not easily amenable to the scientific method of proof or disproof. Hence, as long as there are no significant details that actually do point to their existence (and no, 4chan topics or Quora questions, or even Stackexchange answers are not significant for that).
– AnoE
4 hours ago
7
@DavidRicherby I dunno, that's pretty much what I'd say to anyone who asked me if Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster were real, and I'd absolutely consider that a satisfactory response. The claim is of dubious origin with sketchy details, which is not airtight evidence, but at least suggests its falsehood. How could anyone prove the nonexistence of something?
– Nuclear Wang
3 hours ago
1
The normal skeptical position is that the burden of proof is on the claimant. However, by necessity of the format of the site ("I heard a weird claim. Is it true?") the burden is reversed here; it is put on the answerer. Either way, you are making positive claims: that 4chan was the first to publish it, and "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is made-up, so you need references to support that.
– Oddthinking♦
59 mins ago
1
Arguing that no computer science algorithm would be named after polymers is an argument from personal incredulity. Bozosort is an algorithm. Hairy Ball is a theorem. Bananaman is a type of topological space. Rainbow tables are a data structure. Stable Marriage is a problem.
– Oddthinking♦
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
20
down vote
up vote
20
down vote
NO, it's a 4chan urban legend
"Marianas web" is an expression originating from an infographic first published on 4chan in 2011-early 2012 that attempted to provide a classification of the deep web architecture.
According to this infographic, the web is divided in 5 layers, each more difficult to access, and the deepest is supposed to be "Marianas web"
First of all, it should be noted that the layers chosen are extremely arbitrary, and by no mean is that classification backed by any relevant authorities.
Then, reading the description of the 5th layer shows you need "Polymeric falcighol derivation", described as such :
Shit… I don't really know *****. All I know is that you need to solve quantum mechanics in order to view this on even the normal web, let alone closed servers. Quantum Computation exists, and the government powers have them. So be careful what you do here.
In addition to the fact that the whole "Polymeric falcighol derivation" term is purely made up, Quantum Computing is a very experimental field with no real-world application as of now (let alone in 2012). I believe the existence of "Marianas Web" can thus be dismissed.
According to RationalWiki, the graph was expanded in 2014 where three new levels were added. I'll leave it to you to decide whether those are credible or not.
Sources :
To be honest, explicitly dating an internet phenomenon is quite hard. The earliest source I've found for the infographic dates back to September 2011, and Polymeric falcighol derivation yields only 5000 results, mostly related to deep web topics originating from reddit, quora, or alt-science blogs. Similarly, google trends show a beginning of the trend around October 2011 with a peak in may 2014
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
NO, it's a 4chan urban legend
"Marianas web" is an expression originating from an infographic first published on 4chan in 2011-early 2012 that attempted to provide a classification of the deep web architecture.
According to this infographic, the web is divided in 5 layers, each more difficult to access, and the deepest is supposed to be "Marianas web"
First of all, it should be noted that the layers chosen are extremely arbitrary, and by no mean is that classification backed by any relevant authorities.
Then, reading the description of the 5th layer shows you need "Polymeric falcighol derivation", described as such :
Shit… I don't really know *****. All I know is that you need to solve quantum mechanics in order to view this on even the normal web, let alone closed servers. Quantum Computation exists, and the government powers have them. So be careful what you do here.
In addition to the fact that the whole "Polymeric falcighol derivation" term is purely made up, Quantum Computing is a very experimental field with no real-world application as of now (let alone in 2012). I believe the existence of "Marianas Web" can thus be dismissed.
According to RationalWiki, the graph was expanded in 2014 where three new levels were added. I'll leave it to you to decide whether those are credible or not.
Sources :
To be honest, explicitly dating an internet phenomenon is quite hard. The earliest source I've found for the infographic dates back to September 2011, and Polymeric falcighol derivation yields only 5000 results, mostly related to deep web topics originating from reddit, quora, or alt-science blogs. Similarly, google trends show a beginning of the trend around October 2011 with a peak in may 2014
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
edited 3 hours ago
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
answered 5 hours ago
Aserre
389213
389213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
2
How do you know if was first published on 4chan? How do you know "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is purely made up? I don't see how this is a stronger answer than the refutations the OP has already cited.
– Oddthinking♦
5 hours ago
9
@Oddthinking, the onus is one someone to prove that those things exist, not on anybody else to disprove them. The latter is quite impossible. This is a common scheme with such theories - they are not easily amenable to the scientific method of proof or disproof. Hence, as long as there are no significant details that actually do point to their existence (and no, 4chan topics or Quora questions, or even Stackexchange answers are not significant for that).
– AnoE
4 hours ago
7
@DavidRicherby I dunno, that's pretty much what I'd say to anyone who asked me if Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster were real, and I'd absolutely consider that a satisfactory response. The claim is of dubious origin with sketchy details, which is not airtight evidence, but at least suggests its falsehood. How could anyone prove the nonexistence of something?
– Nuclear Wang
3 hours ago
1
The normal skeptical position is that the burden of proof is on the claimant. However, by necessity of the format of the site ("I heard a weird claim. Is it true?") the burden is reversed here; it is put on the answerer. Either way, you are making positive claims: that 4chan was the first to publish it, and "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is made-up, so you need references to support that.
– Oddthinking♦
59 mins ago
1
Arguing that no computer science algorithm would be named after polymers is an argument from personal incredulity. Bozosort is an algorithm. Hairy Ball is a theorem. Bananaman is a type of topological space. Rainbow tables are a data structure. Stable Marriage is a problem.
– Oddthinking♦
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
2
How do you know if was first published on 4chan? How do you know "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is purely made up? I don't see how this is a stronger answer than the refutations the OP has already cited.
– Oddthinking♦
5 hours ago
9
@Oddthinking, the onus is one someone to prove that those things exist, not on anybody else to disprove them. The latter is quite impossible. This is a common scheme with such theories - they are not easily amenable to the scientific method of proof or disproof. Hence, as long as there are no significant details that actually do point to their existence (and no, 4chan topics or Quora questions, or even Stackexchange answers are not significant for that).
– AnoE
4 hours ago
7
@DavidRicherby I dunno, that's pretty much what I'd say to anyone who asked me if Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster were real, and I'd absolutely consider that a satisfactory response. The claim is of dubious origin with sketchy details, which is not airtight evidence, but at least suggests its falsehood. How could anyone prove the nonexistence of something?
– Nuclear Wang
3 hours ago
1
The normal skeptical position is that the burden of proof is on the claimant. However, by necessity of the format of the site ("I heard a weird claim. Is it true?") the burden is reversed here; it is put on the answerer. Either way, you are making positive claims: that 4chan was the first to publish it, and "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is made-up, so you need references to support that.
– Oddthinking♦
59 mins ago
1
Arguing that no computer science algorithm would be named after polymers is an argument from personal incredulity. Bozosort is an algorithm. Hairy Ball is a theorem. Bananaman is a type of topological space. Rainbow tables are a data structure. Stable Marriage is a problem.
– Oddthinking♦
52 mins ago
2
2
How do you know if was first published on 4chan? How do you know "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is purely made up? I don't see how this is a stronger answer than the refutations the OP has already cited.
– Oddthinking♦
5 hours ago
How do you know if was first published on 4chan? How do you know "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is purely made up? I don't see how this is a stronger answer than the refutations the OP has already cited.
– Oddthinking♦
5 hours ago
9
9
@Oddthinking, the onus is one someone to prove that those things exist, not on anybody else to disprove them. The latter is quite impossible. This is a common scheme with such theories - they are not easily amenable to the scientific method of proof or disproof. Hence, as long as there are no significant details that actually do point to their existence (and no, 4chan topics or Quora questions, or even Stackexchange answers are not significant for that).
– AnoE
4 hours ago
@Oddthinking, the onus is one someone to prove that those things exist, not on anybody else to disprove them. The latter is quite impossible. This is a common scheme with such theories - they are not easily amenable to the scientific method of proof or disproof. Hence, as long as there are no significant details that actually do point to their existence (and no, 4chan topics or Quora questions, or even Stackexchange answers are not significant for that).
– AnoE
4 hours ago
7
7
@DavidRicherby I dunno, that's pretty much what I'd say to anyone who asked me if Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster were real, and I'd absolutely consider that a satisfactory response. The claim is of dubious origin with sketchy details, which is not airtight evidence, but at least suggests its falsehood. How could anyone prove the nonexistence of something?
– Nuclear Wang
3 hours ago
@DavidRicherby I dunno, that's pretty much what I'd say to anyone who asked me if Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster were real, and I'd absolutely consider that a satisfactory response. The claim is of dubious origin with sketchy details, which is not airtight evidence, but at least suggests its falsehood. How could anyone prove the nonexistence of something?
– Nuclear Wang
3 hours ago
1
1
The normal skeptical position is that the burden of proof is on the claimant. However, by necessity of the format of the site ("I heard a weird claim. Is it true?") the burden is reversed here; it is put on the answerer. Either way, you are making positive claims: that 4chan was the first to publish it, and "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is made-up, so you need references to support that.
– Oddthinking♦
59 mins ago
The normal skeptical position is that the burden of proof is on the claimant. However, by necessity of the format of the site ("I heard a weird claim. Is it true?") the burden is reversed here; it is put on the answerer. Either way, you are making positive claims: that 4chan was the first to publish it, and "Polymeric falcighol derivation" is made-up, so you need references to support that.
– Oddthinking♦
59 mins ago
1
1
Arguing that no computer science algorithm would be named after polymers is an argument from personal incredulity. Bozosort is an algorithm. Hairy Ball is a theorem. Bananaman is a type of topological space. Rainbow tables are a data structure. Stable Marriage is a problem.
– Oddthinking♦
52 mins ago
Arguing that no computer science algorithm would be named after polymers is an argument from personal incredulity. Bozosort is an algorithm. Hairy Ball is a theorem. Bananaman is a type of topological space. Rainbow tables are a data structure. Stable Marriage is a problem.
– Oddthinking♦
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
By the definition of the infographic, it sort of does exist.
Following the definitions of the infographic, the 'Marianas Web' is something that you need a
- Closed shell system; and
- Polymeric Falcighol Derivation
to access. Lets, for a moment, just pretend that Polymeric Falcighol Derivation just means 'heavy encryption' (of a ... real ... type) and you are basically describing a 'National Asset' information system.
The United States has them, China has them, NATO has them, Five Eyes has them. I would assume most of the larger nations in the world have them. Some of these systems are small, some are large, some are mutually compatible with others; but none of them are physically connected to the outside internet. The concept of operation is just a separate WAN with entirely separate physical infrastructure: routers, DNS servers, underwater cables or satellites, etc.
The most commonly known of these networks would be SIPRnet, which is an internet-like structure used by the US Department of Defense and is classified Secret. Most people who served in the US Military would be familiar with this system, which is identical to the regular internet from the user's perceptive (there are security-related differences in the transport layer).
Now, I imagine these networks have lots of interesting information on them, like minutes from diplomatic conferences, drawings of nuclear bombs and the current location of warplanes; but, obviously, you won't be finding most of the stuff attributed on that silly infographic.
While these networks are certainly hard to hack; and can't be accessed remotely like the infamous Swordfish hacking scene, you can still get in, just by using the oldest trick in the book: bribe or otherwise compromise someone who has access.
So in some sense, this mythical network does exist.
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Please provide some references to support your claims - e.g. what a National Asset Information System is, and that the US, China, NATO and Five Eyes have one.
– Oddthinking♦
48 mins ago
This is a rather peculiar argument. "Yes there is a network on the Internet called Marianas Web that requires special protocols to access, except that it isn't on the Internet, and it isn't called Marianas Web and doesn't require any special protocols to access. It is just a private network."
– Oddthinking♦
45 mins ago
@Oddthinking - I was just going to post a satirical answer/comment about how I have one (it's a disconnected/turned off computer in my locked basement). BUT Poe's law strikes again.
– user5341
9 mins ago
@Oddthinking This might be more of a note for the OP, but they mention SIPRnet which is a NAIS. JWICS is another example that is used in the US. CRONOS is what NATO uses. However, the gist of them is that they are using encrypted communications protocols that may or may not be transmitted over the broader internet. Accessing them usually requires having the appropriate equipment (ex., Motorola gear) as well as the appropriate cryptographic keys.
– rjzii
3 mins ago
@Oddthinking While I think information is born to be free, but I also am not interested in going to jail. In addition to the content of some of these networks being classified, the existence of such networks is also sometimes classified. The easily verifiable example is SIPRnet, which is referenced, and shares enough characteristics with the 'Marianas Web' that I thought it was worth noting. A wikipedia entry should be sufficient to demonstrate that SIPRnet exists and that it has the ascribed properties.
– kingledion
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
By the definition of the infographic, it sort of does exist.
Following the definitions of the infographic, the 'Marianas Web' is something that you need a
- Closed shell system; and
- Polymeric Falcighol Derivation
to access. Lets, for a moment, just pretend that Polymeric Falcighol Derivation just means 'heavy encryption' (of a ... real ... type) and you are basically describing a 'National Asset' information system.
The United States has them, China has them, NATO has them, Five Eyes has them. I would assume most of the larger nations in the world have them. Some of these systems are small, some are large, some are mutually compatible with others; but none of them are physically connected to the outside internet. The concept of operation is just a separate WAN with entirely separate physical infrastructure: routers, DNS servers, underwater cables or satellites, etc.
The most commonly known of these networks would be SIPRnet, which is an internet-like structure used by the US Department of Defense and is classified Secret. Most people who served in the US Military would be familiar with this system, which is identical to the regular internet from the user's perceptive (there are security-related differences in the transport layer).
Now, I imagine these networks have lots of interesting information on them, like minutes from diplomatic conferences, drawings of nuclear bombs and the current location of warplanes; but, obviously, you won't be finding most of the stuff attributed on that silly infographic.
While these networks are certainly hard to hack; and can't be accessed remotely like the infamous Swordfish hacking scene, you can still get in, just by using the oldest trick in the book: bribe or otherwise compromise someone who has access.
So in some sense, this mythical network does exist.
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Please provide some references to support your claims - e.g. what a National Asset Information System is, and that the US, China, NATO and Five Eyes have one.
– Oddthinking♦
48 mins ago
This is a rather peculiar argument. "Yes there is a network on the Internet called Marianas Web that requires special protocols to access, except that it isn't on the Internet, and it isn't called Marianas Web and doesn't require any special protocols to access. It is just a private network."
– Oddthinking♦
45 mins ago
@Oddthinking - I was just going to post a satirical answer/comment about how I have one (it's a disconnected/turned off computer in my locked basement). BUT Poe's law strikes again.
– user5341
9 mins ago
@Oddthinking This might be more of a note for the OP, but they mention SIPRnet which is a NAIS. JWICS is another example that is used in the US. CRONOS is what NATO uses. However, the gist of them is that they are using encrypted communications protocols that may or may not be transmitted over the broader internet. Accessing them usually requires having the appropriate equipment (ex., Motorola gear) as well as the appropriate cryptographic keys.
– rjzii
3 mins ago
@Oddthinking While I think information is born to be free, but I also am not interested in going to jail. In addition to the content of some of these networks being classified, the existence of such networks is also sometimes classified. The easily verifiable example is SIPRnet, which is referenced, and shares enough characteristics with the 'Marianas Web' that I thought it was worth noting. A wikipedia entry should be sufficient to demonstrate that SIPRnet exists and that it has the ascribed properties.
– kingledion
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
By the definition of the infographic, it sort of does exist.
Following the definitions of the infographic, the 'Marianas Web' is something that you need a
- Closed shell system; and
- Polymeric Falcighol Derivation
to access. Lets, for a moment, just pretend that Polymeric Falcighol Derivation just means 'heavy encryption' (of a ... real ... type) and you are basically describing a 'National Asset' information system.
The United States has them, China has them, NATO has them, Five Eyes has them. I would assume most of the larger nations in the world have them. Some of these systems are small, some are large, some are mutually compatible with others; but none of them are physically connected to the outside internet. The concept of operation is just a separate WAN with entirely separate physical infrastructure: routers, DNS servers, underwater cables or satellites, etc.
The most commonly known of these networks would be SIPRnet, which is an internet-like structure used by the US Department of Defense and is classified Secret. Most people who served in the US Military would be familiar with this system, which is identical to the regular internet from the user's perceptive (there are security-related differences in the transport layer).
Now, I imagine these networks have lots of interesting information on them, like minutes from diplomatic conferences, drawings of nuclear bombs and the current location of warplanes; but, obviously, you won't be finding most of the stuff attributed on that silly infographic.
While these networks are certainly hard to hack; and can't be accessed remotely like the infamous Swordfish hacking scene, you can still get in, just by using the oldest trick in the book: bribe or otherwise compromise someone who has access.
So in some sense, this mythical network does exist.
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
By the definition of the infographic, it sort of does exist.
Following the definitions of the infographic, the 'Marianas Web' is something that you need a
- Closed shell system; and
- Polymeric Falcighol Derivation
to access. Lets, for a moment, just pretend that Polymeric Falcighol Derivation just means 'heavy encryption' (of a ... real ... type) and you are basically describing a 'National Asset' information system.
The United States has them, China has them, NATO has them, Five Eyes has them. I would assume most of the larger nations in the world have them. Some of these systems are small, some are large, some are mutually compatible with others; but none of them are physically connected to the outside internet. The concept of operation is just a separate WAN with entirely separate physical infrastructure: routers, DNS servers, underwater cables or satellites, etc.
The most commonly known of these networks would be SIPRnet, which is an internet-like structure used by the US Department of Defense and is classified Secret. Most people who served in the US Military would be familiar with this system, which is identical to the regular internet from the user's perceptive (there are security-related differences in the transport layer).
Now, I imagine these networks have lots of interesting information on them, like minutes from diplomatic conferences, drawings of nuclear bombs and the current location of warplanes; but, obviously, you won't be finding most of the stuff attributed on that silly infographic.
While these networks are certainly hard to hack; and can't be accessed remotely like the infamous Swordfish hacking scene, you can still get in, just by using the oldest trick in the book: bribe or otherwise compromise someone who has access.
So in some sense, this mythical network does exist.
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
edited 2 hours ago
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
answered 2 hours ago
kingledion
908213
908213
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Please provide some references to support your claims - e.g. what a National Asset Information System is, and that the US, China, NATO and Five Eyes have one.
– Oddthinking♦
48 mins ago
This is a rather peculiar argument. "Yes there is a network on the Internet called Marianas Web that requires special protocols to access, except that it isn't on the Internet, and it isn't called Marianas Web and doesn't require any special protocols to access. It is just a private network."
– Oddthinking♦
45 mins ago
@Oddthinking - I was just going to post a satirical answer/comment about how I have one (it's a disconnected/turned off computer in my locked basement). BUT Poe's law strikes again.
– user5341
9 mins ago
@Oddthinking This might be more of a note for the OP, but they mention SIPRnet which is a NAIS. JWICS is another example that is used in the US. CRONOS is what NATO uses. However, the gist of them is that they are using encrypted communications protocols that may or may not be transmitted over the broader internet. Accessing them usually requires having the appropriate equipment (ex., Motorola gear) as well as the appropriate cryptographic keys.
– rjzii
3 mins ago
@Oddthinking While I think information is born to be free, but I also am not interested in going to jail. In addition to the content of some of these networks being classified, the existence of such networks is also sometimes classified. The easily verifiable example is SIPRnet, which is referenced, and shares enough characteristics with the 'Marianas Web' that I thought it was worth noting. A wikipedia entry should be sufficient to demonstrate that SIPRnet exists and that it has the ascribed properties.
– kingledion
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Please provide some references to support your claims - e.g. what a National Asset Information System is, and that the US, China, NATO and Five Eyes have one.
– Oddthinking♦
48 mins ago
This is a rather peculiar argument. "Yes there is a network on the Internet called Marianas Web that requires special protocols to access, except that it isn't on the Internet, and it isn't called Marianas Web and doesn't require any special protocols to access. It is just a private network."
– Oddthinking♦
45 mins ago
@Oddthinking - I was just going to post a satirical answer/comment about how I have one (it's a disconnected/turned off computer in my locked basement). BUT Poe's law strikes again.
– user5341
9 mins ago
@Oddthinking This might be more of a note for the OP, but they mention SIPRnet which is a NAIS. JWICS is another example that is used in the US. CRONOS is what NATO uses. However, the gist of them is that they are using encrypted communications protocols that may or may not be transmitted over the broader internet. Accessing them usually requires having the appropriate equipment (ex., Motorola gear) as well as the appropriate cryptographic keys.
– rjzii
3 mins ago
@Oddthinking While I think information is born to be free, but I also am not interested in going to jail. In addition to the content of some of these networks being classified, the existence of such networks is also sometimes classified. The easily verifiable example is SIPRnet, which is referenced, and shares enough characteristics with the 'Marianas Web' that I thought it was worth noting. A wikipedia entry should be sufficient to demonstrate that SIPRnet exists and that it has the ascribed properties.
– kingledion
2 mins ago
Please provide some references to support your claims - e.g. what a National Asset Information System is, and that the US, China, NATO and Five Eyes have one.
– Oddthinking♦
48 mins ago
Please provide some references to support your claims - e.g. what a National Asset Information System is, and that the US, China, NATO and Five Eyes have one.
– Oddthinking♦
48 mins ago
This is a rather peculiar argument. "Yes there is a network on the Internet called Marianas Web that requires special protocols to access, except that it isn't on the Internet, and it isn't called Marianas Web and doesn't require any special protocols to access. It is just a private network."
– Oddthinking♦
45 mins ago
This is a rather peculiar argument. "Yes there is a network on the Internet called Marianas Web that requires special protocols to access, except that it isn't on the Internet, and it isn't called Marianas Web and doesn't require any special protocols to access. It is just a private network."
– Oddthinking♦
45 mins ago
@Oddthinking - I was just going to post a satirical answer/comment about how I have one (it's a disconnected/turned off computer in my locked basement). BUT Poe's law strikes again.
– user5341
9 mins ago
@Oddthinking - I was just going to post a satirical answer/comment about how I have one (it's a disconnected/turned off computer in my locked basement). BUT Poe's law strikes again.
– user5341
9 mins ago
@Oddthinking This might be more of a note for the OP, but they mention SIPRnet which is a NAIS. JWICS is another example that is used in the US. CRONOS is what NATO uses. However, the gist of them is that they are using encrypted communications protocols that may or may not be transmitted over the broader internet. Accessing them usually requires having the appropriate equipment (ex., Motorola gear) as well as the appropriate cryptographic keys.
– rjzii
3 mins ago
@Oddthinking This might be more of a note for the OP, but they mention SIPRnet which is a NAIS. JWICS is another example that is used in the US. CRONOS is what NATO uses. However, the gist of them is that they are using encrypted communications protocols that may or may not be transmitted over the broader internet. Accessing them usually requires having the appropriate equipment (ex., Motorola gear) as well as the appropriate cryptographic keys.
– rjzii
3 mins ago
@Oddthinking While I think information is born to be free, but I also am not interested in going to jail. In addition to the content of some of these networks being classified, the existence of such networks is also sometimes classified. The easily verifiable example is SIPRnet, which is referenced, and shares enough characteristics with the 'Marianas Web' that I thought it was worth noting. A wikipedia entry should be sufficient to demonstrate that SIPRnet exists and that it has the ascribed properties.
– kingledion
2 mins ago
@Oddthinking While I think information is born to be free, but I also am not interested in going to jail. In addition to the content of some of these networks being classified, the existence of such networks is also sometimes classified. The easily verifiable example is SIPRnet, which is referenced, and shares enough characteristics with the 'Marianas Web' that I thought it was worth noting. A wikipedia entry should be sufficient to demonstrate that SIPRnet exists and that it has the ascribed properties.
– kingledion
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
3
It's going to be very difficult to provide any answer other than "we don't know"... to say "No there's not" would require proving a negative! I think the question as worded "Is there any evidence..." is much more answerable.
– elliot svensson
4 hours ago
I feel like this is going to be like trying to prove that aliens aren't being stored in Area 51. If there's no evidence for something that's supposedly real and well hidden, people will just use that lack of evidence as proof that it's real and well hidden.
– Giter
4 hours ago
2
When you're treating an image from 4chan that's obviously a joke as evidence of a rumor, it must be a truly slow week.
– IllusiveBrian
4 hours ago