moore’s law, bw increases, disk space increases are measured annually on an exponential scale. I am afraid you are just plain wrong in this assertion,
Quantum etc. is a future tech, granted, that is why a smile before stating the facts that I did. These are facts and measurable now and for the last 15 years. It is safe to assume a correlation from the last 15 years and the next few weeks. Nothing is guaranteed, ever, but probability has to be accounted for in a statistically valid manner. Facts are facts, hand waving must be something else.
You are mashing together different things that can’t all be equated (some can, some can’t). Some applications require good (low) latency while other are less concerned with it. That graph I posted illustrates that very point: telephony and FPS games require very low latency, while other apps don’t.
I’m as much a future-phile as anyone, but I’m not wrong in my claim that what we are doing here with all these tests is in a different time domain from what we can expect in 15 years. Or if I am wrong, then tell me how: is the time frame for a production SAFEnet really comparable to 15-years from now technology?
Anyway, we seem to have wandered from what prompted the discussion, since I have never doubted SAFEnet’s possibility. I do claim that workarounds such as out-of-SAFE data channels will be needed for certain latency sensitive apps, with SAFE doing the setup.
Latency depends on so many things. Say I start to download a 400mb. file. Is latency a problem? I think it’s not as long as it’s not seconds. But that’s where some tricks come in play:
Being connected to 4 relay_nodes means downloading the movie parallel over several nodes. not really important if the latency to the first chunks of the movie 150ms or 320ms. These are just blink of the eyes.
using the fastest nodes like David said is a smart thing. compare it to a “ping” of all your 32 nodes. You make a list out of it and use the top 10 out of the 32 nodes for the best speeds. The next nodes (close to your close nodes) will do that as well, so that should really give some extra speed. The slow nodes are still okay for security of the network as routing messages and signs are just very small data pieces.
Video conferencing?
Only use the 3 fastest nodes to do that. These types of data could have their own tag_type so other nodes only use the 3 fastest nodes as well. In this case the latency might be a problem, but only if the latency goes above 1 second or so. The good news is that parallel connections help here as well. 2 nodes for the video data and 1 for the PAR data to make 1 and 2 more secure/fast.
Chats?
Not really a problem as long as we stay under a second. But I think we’ll do better than that.
High speed gaming?
That’s already a problem, the latency for SAFE is probably to high.
But here’s the future:
5G Vision: 100 Billion connections, 1 ms Latency, and 10 Gbps Throughput
And Kurzweil shows in chart after chart that all information tech is becoming faster. So expect latency to get to sub ms in the coming years.
Just for reference, because I know how hard it is for some people to click on anything except the like button, I post here the links I was referring to:
[My post on obfuscated file transfer]
(Obfuscated File Transfer “My post on obfuscated file transfer”)
Note that my idea of obfuscated file transfer wasn’t for the purpose of reducing latency, but instead was looking at ways that bitorrent type of apps might make more efficient use of SAFEnet by only using it for the setup. And I have since realized that it might also serve to address the latency issue.
If I’ve learned something about that failed ‘faster-than-light’-neutrino CERN experiment a couple of years ago, then it is that scientists are pretty convinced that max speed = light speed, also for communication: Faster-than-light communication - Wikipedia.
So one has to work around this: ‘local’ communication where needed and possible and if long distances are necessary: the least amount of roundtrips possible.
There has been some discoveries around quantum entanglement with experiments showing the effect to be “instantaneous” and not at the speed of light. Been a couple of years since I looked into it, so things (analysis of it) could have changed, but hey one day I will look into it again and see how far they have gone with it.
From what I gathered so far about quantum entanglement is that information can’t be transmitted in this fashion, otherwise it would allow retrocausality
Who knows what tomorrow brings, but like quantum crypto, it’s not worth waiting on for now. There are really very cool things closer to hand such as Atom wranglers create rewritable memory | Nature and the likes that seem to show the increase in disk sizes is not stopping. There is plenty of advances in bandwidth as well, so were looking good for continued rapid growth. We will definitely use that growth though as we have shown to date with all our data consumption and transfer.
OT-ing again, but @dirvine how do you manage to find time to be on top of all these scientific advances, be actively present on the forum, and developing.
It is like you are omnipresent, are you… God?
You can find high level uptodate physical stuff on the PBS Space Time youtube channel. I don’t pretend to fully understand those videoclips, but they are never the less interesting.
In this videoclip about Quantum tunneling around 7:10 they say they will make one in the future about Quantum entanglement: Is Quantum Tunneling Faster than Light? | Space Time | PBS Digital Studios - YouTube …
Teleporting people through space, as is done in Star Trek, is impossible by the laws of physics. Teleporting information is another matter, however, thanks to the extraordinary world of quantum mechanics. Researchers at TU Delft’s Kavli Institute of Nanoscience have succeeded in deterministically transferring the information contained in a quantum bit – the quantum analogue of a classical bit - to a different quantum bit 3 metres away, without the information having travelled through the intervening space: teleportation. The results will be published online in Science, on Thursday 29 May.
These smart Dutch folks ;-).
What I can imagine with this is that we one day have communication using a technique like this. It won’t go faster than light because at the beginning and the end you always need to work with photons or electrons etc. But as the information does seem to take some loophole in the universe (as it doesn’t travel through space/time) we might have sub millisecond connections all over the universe one day .
)
.