Government powers to crush decentralised technology

The OP on the link I’ve posted seems to have serious doubts about the real value of decentralised technology such as MaidSafe and Bitcoin with regard to its liberation of the masses.

Decentrally mined currency has failed and can’t possibly be rescued

I don’t have enough (any) computer programming skills to really joust with him, so would some of you mind taking a look and voicing your opinion here about the merit of his arguments please?

Thanks.
Martin.

When people say cannot, proclaim themselves experts and claim to have deeply investigated a technology and those behind it, (talking about David Levene who I think is me) then they join a huge queue of other ‘experts’ and good luck to them :slight_smile: I have read some of that posters comments and find them severely wanting… Certainly their understanding of SAFE is pretty far from anything close to complete.

Let the experts expert and the self proclaimed software gurus be gurus and continue their deep investigations with all the gusto of a nearly deflated balloon that makes strange raspberry noises.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion though, but to accuse people of hand waving and being evasive in a hand waving and evasive manner is not all that clever IMHO.

Don’t know if that answers the question Martin, but it’s my immediate thoughts, I keep away from bitcointalk as it is too full of experts and people who do very little checking of facts in many cases (plus I am way to busy). It used to be really good though.

6 Likes

Thanks for looking and your reply.

I tried to put the alternative view (posting as ArnoldChippy there), but he seems immovable in his view and I wondered why he would hold that opinion so strongly.

I don’t like to believe he would do it just for the sake of argument, so asking here seemed as the best place for informed opinion.

Nice to get a reply here from “the man himself”.

Cheers, Martin.

2 Likes

We’ve tried government.

1 Like

People,

I read the link but isn’t there some truth to his comment: “It is impossible there can be all 3 of true anonymity, fast enough transactions, and truly decentralized mining consensus.”? Everything I have read about MaidSafe so far has made me more enthusiastic about the possibilities but in the back of my mind (for a couple of the applications I am interested in developing at least) has been the issue of speed - if I want good speed of response from a DB, surely having to recover encrypted bits from other machines out on the network somewhere and putting them back together into the original file so that something can be done with it, can NEVER be as fast as just grabbing the unencrypted file from a local hard disk. ie You trade off security etc for speed?

Regards,
Phil.

There is some truth in this, but be careful of sweeping statements. TLS/SSL encrypts and can slow down internet connections, but noticeable for general public, I am not sure?

Again though, what appears to be and what is are not always the same. The xor stuff we do is hard to grasp, but does indeed provide many amazing things, the ability to replicate/emulate huge networks in very small segments as an example (the group sees the network from only the group perspective). So to get a transaction done for instance we can do it in a group, fully encrypted end to end, way faster than bitcoin (not sniping or competing here, just a point) where the transaction needs transmitted to everyone.

I will give you an interesting part of our history here. A few years back we did some experiments and tests with the NHS in our local county. This was to provide a single server for diacom (xray) images. I was disappointed in the single server as it meant using pretty much only our encrypt library and very cut down versions of the rest (no network).

We used a multi disk ssd server with 24 cores. So we could test encrypt and use drive in a manner that was multi user.

Those drives were 300Mb/s and we could write to them at that speed with unencrypted data (it basically streams). We then put the data through our system and the encrypt library was able to process it.

So we has a 300Mb/s system and added encrypt.

Our system then processed the data at nearly 1Gb/s !! so we added chunking, encrypt and real time de-duplication and went over 3X faster :wink:

What? we add several steps and the process is faster, how so? It is due to the parallelism we could get, rather than streaming a file start -> end, we could split it across cores and then use the multi threaded aspect of SSD drives to write multiple parts at the same time.

So we encrypted, went faster, but it was not over. Even on a single server with not so compressible images (dicom) we were compared with the existing de-duplication system, Microsoft. Microsoft deduplication (which I believe is not real time) on that single box achieved 8-9% de-duplication figures. We achieved (with real time deduplicatiion) over 48% savings.

So all is not always as it seems, encrypt for instance can be done at a throughout of 800Mb/s with some ciphers so if there is a decent pipeline used in the process and writing to disk or network is slower than 800Mb/s (they pretty much all are) then this slower link will not be the part of the chain that slows you down (so add or don’t it will make no difference).

So a disk (old magnetic disk) has a xfer rate of 30-40Mb/s, ssds are around 300Mb/s and if a cipher is 800Mb/s then the impact can be near zero, in fact just do what we do and do not use convention and the normal ways (parallelism) can prove we can add more functions, features and process and go faster.

SAFE is hard to explain and these parts are hard, but give me great hope that as we progress, things like this show us that is seems we are onto something very big as we find more and more really nice surprises like this along the way.

In terms of that commenter, I am sure there will be elements of truth there somewhere, just like any good misinformed self proclaimed expert, generally will have :wink: When he stops telling folk their IQ is not good enough to talk to, or he actually presents some real info rather than cat nap dreams I would take the info provided with a pinch of salt.

7 Likes

David,

Thanks for that background! - it is pretty mind-blowing stuff! The apps I have in mind so far are the Chatbot / AI / Avatar where latency in live responses (as opposed to emailed responses) is going to be critical to the end user. The real-time, political organisation management tool is less latency critical but the snappier the system is the better of course.

Have the GitHub issues been dealt with? Should I attempt another build on Fedora 20 x86_64? - I can’t wait to get something running and then see networked stuff going too!

Regards,
Phil.

I am pretty sure they have, at least all the CI machines are building and testing OK. I am personally on a routing refactor so pretty intense and not looking as much as I should but Ben and Ross are all over the next branch stability.

Another point that can be made is the fact that when I connect to google to check my email, only 1 connection is used. Same For Vimeo, Youtube etc. Let’s say a Safenet channel is 4 times slower in retrieving the chunks to show me the same video as the one on Vimeo due to decryption. So, with 5 ip-connections to get me the chunks the speed can go up to 1,25 times Vimeo’s speed! Youtube will show you a lot of ads, which you can click away after 3 or more seconds. On Safenet people can make money with their videos just by uploading them. If the video is populair some caching will be done as well.

4 Likes

polpolrene,

Good points - thanks for that. Now if I can just get this Fedora build going I might be closer to testing some of this stuff . .

Regards,
Phil.

Or install docker and use the docker container :slight_smile: then you have an ubuntu docker that you can update and play with and easily remove etc.

Yes, I did think of that after I posted the other topic - but I get a bit obsessive about things not working so I will persist with the native build anyway . . I will probably look at the docker container in the near future though . .

P.

Gents (and Ladies),

While I am certainly a proponent of MaidSAFE (Ethereum, etc.), I find discussions to center around technology at the expense of other factors that may play a role in the ultimate success (or demise) of truly revolutionary decentralized systems.

Indeed, I am guilty of visualizing most of my problems as “nails” to my problem-solving skills as a “hammer”.

My own particular professional areas are Mechanical Engineering, Business, and Law. And, during my career, I’ve seen the best “new widgets on the block” get absorbed by the massive “Blobs of corruption”. I certainly see that with XBT - to the extent that certain “Blockchain” forks are absorbed & molded into what the Powers-That-Be need (Ripple?).

With that in mind, I have to ask a question that has been gnawing at me over this last year:

“Can MaidSAFE be (provably) made 100% incorruptible?”

Please allow me to provide some context to this question…

From a Supplier perspective, we’ve seen “plausible evidence” from people like Jacob Applebaum of router (and other device) tampering from certain “bad actors”.
From a Competitor perspective, we’ve seen IBM, the Fed, and Ripple come up with “Me Too” products that are attracting the attention of otherwise intelligent Sheep.
From a Regulation/Legal perspective…OK…who are we kidding…(you may want to research an American named Bill Windsor and what he is doing in an Idaho jail cell as I write this post)
[I assert that Mr. Windsor is in jail, in part, because MaidSAFE doesn’t exist quite yet]
From a Customer perspective…OK…again…let’s be real. Most of the globe is busy watching the Teli (aka the Boob Tube). I continually see us preaching to each other’s choir.

So, I have to ask again:

“Can MaidSAFE be (provably) made 100% incorruptible?”

If my expertise was in IT, MaidSAFE would already have my resume.

Thanks Ladies, Gents, David, and the MaidSAFE team :relaxed:

PS: Yes, I do realize that there is no such animal as 100% so please do frame any responses in terms of Risk Mitigation.

1 Like

But I get what you are saying so much. The same line of thinking keeps occurring to me as well. There is a incredible world of difference between provably %100 SAFE and 99.9999 and a big difference again between 99.9999 and 99.999999999999999999999999999999999. And lets say that some stuff won’t come out until can be proven its 100% safe. But lets say that we can prove that we can’t do that? Well then some things will only come out (because people have to be able to live with themselves) if we show its about as good as it can possibly be. And in the back of my mind I think time machines are out there, which means all of time and space can be examined by someone. Moreover that its all just us and our war on ourselves and we will soon enough discover that all the streams of experience are one and all of it accessible. So for our current political situation SAFE needs to be, in my estimate 99.99 hyper bar. Because for some stuff, some vitally important stuff, I am afraid in practical terms its you, your family and everyone you ever knew on the line. They often won’t trust the loners.

Thanks, Warren. I think my point got a bit obfuscated from the over concentration of your “99.99 vs. 99.999 vs…” metrics.

My point, if I had to simplify it, can be stated as: “What sorts of (very powerful) things will probably (attempt to) corrupt systems like MaidSAFE?”

In contrast to the “Bill Windsor” example I gave above, I’d LOVE to have a TRUSTED network with which I can disseminate important information to the world in efforts to help change it for the better :wink:

1 Like

Yes and as you point out TRUSTED. Because once we have that or on the way to it, it will be spun as unreliable and broken…

Yes, I certainly agree that “Spin” will happen - especially done by those organizations whose businesses (and Governments) are impacted by MaidSAFE.

My original question, though, is related to what WE may need to protect against. By “WE”, I mean those of us that support MaidSAFE and its potential success.

As an example, I saw a point that you had made with regard to Farmer equipment. In your post, you were recommending some potentially “Trustworthy” Farming equipment.

Thanks again! :wink:

1 Like

Yes SAFE may provide a small flame, a homestead in the virtual. We need to leverage that into an equivalent in the tangible. Let us have open source SAFE mesh hardware that we can fab ourselves in that we in essence not only own and controll the hardward and software that make up the network in an open source way but give us fabers that can fab more of themselves. Spread decentralization so our physical homesteads provide us with food water, transport and comfort witout bills or debt. At that point we can have a voluntary society. Its all paid for and it stays in families.

Excellent point, Warren. This type of activity is precisely what I was trying to elude to in my original post under “Supplier perspective”. While I have both Windows and Mac machines…I don’t fully “Trust” them - even when I use Tor, PGP, Enigmail, etc.

Now, a new sub-question to my original post becomes answered, in part, from some of the previous postings by you and others. While those posts relate more to Farmers, what type/kind of hardware and software should be used by the end-users of the MaidSAFE network? Once LIVE, can I continue to use my old Mac or Windows machines?

Very Much Appreciated,

1 Like

Thank you. I think that there is a group of us that arent happy until the whole software stack is SAFE open and the hardware is open built on processes from the ground up that defeat hardware trojans. @chrisfostertv and @Luckybit have been very helpful exploring the line of thought. Chris noted the software defined radio, kind of like pcell and has provided a bunch of links. Someone else here brought up programable gate array hardware as a way to (in my understanding) pour in partially randomized hardware design through software to help with hardware trojans- being able to literally reconfigure the hardware making hardware snoops harder.

I’ve wanted something cheap but milspec with solar and battery back up kind of like a super low power mesh node in a gshock watch type format with good range and very low latency- knowing that mesh usuallly thought of as high latency. This came up in a thread from July or August. I kept thinking dustributed computing on mesh would require good node signal range but low latency. Was hung up on the idea of whether a pcell wired backhaul and its central server compute load could adapted to a mesh in software. Was very bothered by the idea of being able to somehow jam white space or clutter or auction it etc. Then I remembered Luckybit was pointing to short range lifi when longer range free space optical was being tossed about as a way to route around state and corporate manipulations. I looked up the lifi spec again and was stunned because here was something that was super low power, super low latency, very high bandwidth, almost unjammable, not subject to much signal degredation, crosstalk or noise, has absolutely massive spectrum, is dirt cheap, and could be built into every light fixture on the planet crucially including car light bulbs and head/tail lights and can run in the dark and be made to reflect off surfaces so that your neighbor and you shining exterior house lights at night or invisible ambient mode in the day would establish a link if aimed at the same patch of side walk or wall… !!! and then it was suddenly clear that they cant stop us or jam us not even with stupidity like finding way to give reallocated broadcast spectrum and white space over to cable companies.

1 Like