A Second (vampire) network attack - discussion

Even Chia has explicitly written that they will give tokens to Global 5000 companies and not just to any spammer.


Privacy. Security. Freedom

1 Like

I’m not assuming you are suggesting either. I’m just saying what I would and wouldn’t support.

3 Likes

Hands up all the people who think the plan should be to release the network and then sit back, smirk and do nothing?

I’m putting this in a jokey way there, but my point is just that - I think everyone agrees that even if the technology is amazing and world-redefining, which it certainly is, the most logical thing to do nonetheless is to make the network resilient and strong in every way we can think of.

Jim is on the ball here and I am happy seeing it repeated ad nauseum - it is about the data.

Don’t think you are saying the opposite, but just pointing out, I really do imagine that almost everyone would agree that more chance of success is better.

When someone lists a few things that will turn people’s heads at launch, or lists a few groups that might be very excited to join when they realise that it works and all the capabilities it has, it is not the same as saying “Ah, how lovely, let’s all sit back and do nothing”.

So yes - thinking about how to make safecoin accessible and useful (exchanges, wrapping, etc) is essential. Thinking about getting good data onto the network is also essential. Talking about these things, looking at what other projects are doing, all helps.

I’m still entirely unconvinced, however, that framing it in terms of ‘other projects will definitely attack us, it’ll be a bitter struggle to the death, and we’ll have no inherent advantage in that struggle’ makes any sense at all though, and I still don’t feel like I’ve seen any justification for framing it that way.

Strategically, I feel we could spend more time thinking about actual positive ways to increase the likelihood of Safe providing its fundamentals to humanity and less time talking as if there is some disagreement between people who want to sit back and let fate decide, and another side who have seen the dangers of the real world. It’s a false dichotomy, I don’t think those sides exist.

5 Likes

Very interesting view of the world. Do you think there are people who will literally sit down and think about how to create a copy of Safe to make money?


Privacy. Security. Freedom

They can think about that while we put in place improvements etc. The world works this way. Bitcoin as an example is actually quite simple single purpose device. Being that, it’s easy to copy/clone and more. The data element is just money transactions and these by definition are transferable tokens, exchanges make them transferable across chains and other mediums (fiat). However it’s a single purpose device.

Safe is not single purpose, it has not got a single algorithm or data type. It’s more complex and has many purposes.

Some of these purposes will appear via apps.

I won’t say more as it gets into my opinion, however I will say the more complex an evolving product/service is then the more difficult it is to attack as you describe. I don’t mean copy the code, anyone can do that, but what are you holding? how does it really work? what direction should it go in? what are the weaknesses that the originators are working on? so many questions now around the thing you copied. I hope this helps, but the difference from cloning an almost complete implementation of a single algorithm to cloning a more complex evolving product is not insignificant.

Then there is outcome! if the outcome is privacy security and freedom for all humanity, we still win. So given the massive hurdle as explained above and getting past that, maybe even understanding what you have and progressing it, then as long as it does what we always wanted, we are probably in a good place.

4 Likes

I can’t know what’s in the future and what kind of people will copy Safe. Personally, I prefer our network to be the largest and most used, and if various “hacks” such as the ERC20 token, collecting donations/or using a foundation and uploading useful data, keeping a fund to be used to further stimulate farmers - can help - I’m for these “hacks”. And when I see another product put them into practice, of course I will raise the issue once again.


Privacy. Security. Freedom

2 Likes

If you think my message could suggest that I am claiming people won’ t do that, there’s unfortunately been a complete misunderstanding. I don’t think I can state my point more clearly, and I suspect you can’t see outside your framing of the problem. I thought that would be the outcome, but wanted to make the point clearly in any case.

Last ditch attempt haha yes, I find it very probable that someone will sit down and think hmmm who are these Safe people, how do I get some of that money for myself. I am just saying that framing that problem the way you do - as a war-esque thing that we should be terrified of, that we need to ‘hack’ our way out of, shows weakness and fear.

We should plan, we should expect the worst, we should be realistic, we should be honest, we should be positive in our messaging and our language, and we should be confident that we can ‘stake all vampires in the heart’ (example of the language we don’t need) if we focus on making the network as useful and wonderful as it could be.

I’m saying there’s a very large gap between:

“How can we think of ways to get data onto Safe which is useful and interesting and that people will be interested in engaging with, learning from, building projects with? How do we organise it, what groups on the clearnet might be interested?”

and

“Vampires, death, greed, destruction, Safe has to win”

I am caricaturising to make my point there, I know you don’t say it that dramatically. But it does feel a bit like that, to be honest, and I think that strategically it is a less good way to think about something that yes, we should be thinking about.

3 Likes

I understand that there are people who take the discussion emotionally - I understand it very well, because there are people who literally tell me to shut up in this and other topics.

That’s ok, people want to think positively and cheerfully and don’t want to read what I write. I don’t care how these people feel and I won’t spare anyone’s feelings.

I say the problem as I see it, if it makes some people feel unhappy, that feeling comes from them, not from me.

I am interested in the Safe Network to succeed and bring good to the world. And in the future, I will continue to say what I believe will help the network when new information emerges.


Privacy. Security. Freedom

2 Likes

Not feeling in the least bit emotional at any stage of this discussion with you, firstly. I was trying to suggest you frame the problem otherwise, and was saying that I believe your choice of framing is unhelpful even to achieve the thing you want to achieve.

In the end, it is either true that there are two groups like you say, roughly something like ‘the positive people who ignore the danger’ and ‘the realistic people who see the danger’, or it is being invented and is counterproductive. I’ve made it clear how I feel about it, and encourage you to keep doing your thing however you see fit.

2 Likes

It reminds me of (not applicable here, but good never the less).

Optimists invent aeroplanes
Pessimists invent parachutes

As G. B Shaw says, we need both :slight_smile:

9 Likes

David, since you are so generous with wisdom, can you answer this question for me? I get out of bed 365 days a year, for so many years … These are nearly 9,000 abdominal presses. How come I don’t have a single abdominal plate, huh?


Privacy. Security. Freedom

1 Like

You have Irvine genes in you I can guess :slight_smile:

2 Likes

The Bulgarian Empire has reached 3 seas, but not all the way to the Kingdom of Scotland :wink:


Privacy. Security. Freedom

1 Like

Privacy. Security. Freedom

3 Likes

Lost them to Chia farmers maybe?

1 Like

Yes:

Some people remember, I said I’d give any number of disks to storj. And so it was, until the discs jump in price several times. With the advent of chia. First unused tens of TB was occupied, then I started to remove the nodes, freeing the discs.
In storj i provide 220TB Total 160TB used. (mostly on raids)

To make the cost of using free 60tb i need to rent and tunnel the ips. Manage additional locations. Pay more providers links. This is an additional cost and hemorrhoids.

The truth is that storj no need my drives.
Or worse, real customers don’t need storj for it price.

By now, I’ve got 12 chia. 180TB occupied.


Privacy. Security. Freedom

3 Likes

Just curious where that last quote was from?
I searched with the quote but only got a hit on your quote and not the original

1 Like

It is from here:


Privacy. Security. Freedom

1 Like