I think I was more curious from those of you who are technically inclined if this was good or bad for potential cross integrations and if not having it was a downside for maid. I understand what you are saying though.
To be clear you are asking if a theoretical network (as it’s not in beta yet), can be theoretically taken over.
The Safe Network is possibly the most complex autonomous crypto project every designed. It has many safeguards in the design against Sybil attack.
But Sybil attack success is a question of scale - how much resources does the attacker have (and are willing to lose) and how much resources do the good nodes in the network have.
ANY network can lose to a Sybil attack if the attacker is willing to throw enough resources at it. If world governments were to really push hard against Bitcoin, bye-bye BTC.
Safe Network should IMO, have good advantages here - consumer-facing product means huge numbers of nodes - far more than BTC. Xor addressing means it’s really hard for attackers to gain a foothold - they really have to mass attack - overwhelm the network with nodes. Adults and Elders means that the attacker has to spend a lot of resource (think actual wealth/value/money) to gain control even AFTER they have swarmed the network.
So theoretically, the Safe Network should, IMO, be highly resistant to Sybil attacks - once it is established. Notice my caveat at the end. Until it has a fair number of nodes, it is vulnerable IF a wealthy attacker decides to take it down … then what … it goes back up again and the attacker has to spend more wealth to take it down again …rinse wash repeat, are the attackers pockets infinite?
So ultimately, “can it be sybilled”? yeah, sure … but will it?
What is the ultimate answer to the ultimate question of life the universe and everything?
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
There are a lot of buzzwords in that that are not necessarily used correctly and it is clear that he has not done general research beyond ‘scripture’ (cue to St Vitalik with a shining lambo). Let’s pick a random example:
“Small work network” … charitably assuming he means a “small world network” (formally meaning that while every node may not be connected to peers, their connections are likely to be, and if not … under certain circumstances the chance of successful data retrieval degrades) e.g. how many direct hops does it take to reach data…
As a quick aside, we know that TOR is generally not broken and it has a worse ‘small world’ score than SAFE, but I digress… We know that there is a max bound that scales with log(N) nodes, and can be substantively minimized (e.g you - elder - elder_responsible_node - storage_node_with_data), so that falls on its face. “destroying a small [world] network” is at best a misaprehension. Language like “masternodes”? Pls leave your blockchain world and well worn critiques of competitors… , etc. etc.
Hate to say it, but there is a shit load of this inbound. First they laugh, then they dismiss, then they fight, etc. etc.
I think the number of people who do currently care, and the new people coming that will care and “get it” will be a large enough number so that we don’t to care about what’s inbound.
We will progress by doing, not talking (marketing pumps in all other coins).
Once my data is online - what do I care about the misinformed criticisms from some dude?
I will have immediate satisfaction from the network unlike people who follow blockchain tech who need to wait for gainz in their investment and are fragile to any criticism.
Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
Haha just caught up with this thread. The guy is so very sure of himself and so totally and comically wrong. The Dunning-Kruger effect is strong in that one. What a plonker.
Referring to oneself as a ‘polymath’ as he does in his Twitter bio is usually a bad sign…
Polymath experts are rarely worth debating It’s the sad side of crypto currencies, a lot of new to the world experts, technical experts who are experts in cryptography, concurrency, consensus, economics, business models and well after a while they do prove expertise in … nothing at all.
Isn’t it 42???
Cruel but true, no offense!
Well it depends on the actual question. And in order to understand this question, we must build the greatest network ever envisioned … therefore we must contract with these network builders in Magrathea Ayr.
Thanks, this is great, love it!
Why do I feel that when crypto gurus think the safe-network is broken, that this is an advantage?
Musk, always lies during presentations, by underpromising, clouding the facts, or distracting, while secretly, and subtlety overdelivering.
His strategy is to fool his competitors into giving them a false sense of security, thinking Tesla is further behind than they actually are.
Tesla is so far ahead by now, not many legacy auto manufacturers will ever catch up… like this Polymath expert, the legacy AMs don’t understand what Tesla tech is. It is not a car company, it is a software company. The software is the secret sauce that makes EV’s efficient.
Anyway, Maid Safe has a lot of secret sauce…
So Let them think MAID is broken. And in the shadows the network will grow. And by the time the gurus pay close enough attention, it will be too late to attack. Musk is playing a battlefield strategy: hide your true numbers, and the enemy will be in for a surprise… we will win the war, lol
He’s talking nonsense about Arweave too now, calling it an IPFS clone. The guy is just making stuff up. Arweave stores data on chain, which is nothing like IPFS for better or worse.
The last sentence says it all. “It’s not a blockchain” so it cannot be good.
He is right though, it is not a crypto currency at all. The closest is digital currency but now renamed to what it actually is Distributed storage and protocols with a Digital Token
SAFE Network vs Everything (v3.3) Table
Added from v3.1:
1.) Technical Capabilities - (Row) Categories with color shade distinction: Speed, Security, Privacy, Efficiency, Simplicity, Flexibility
2.) Blockchain: (Column) Proof of Storage - For Sia Coin storage network
3.) Technical Capabilities (Row): Smart Contracts
4.) Clearnet Cloud Services (Column): Tresorit
Adjusted from v3.1:
1.) Technical Capabilities #7 (Row): Renamed “Efficient Energy/Matter Usage” to "No SHA Mining (direct resource network)
2.) Double line for Column names to compact width space
3.) “Post Beta” instead of Check marks in Safe Network (Column)
Is #7 “No SHA Mining (direct resrouce network)” (Row) weirdly phrased? Is their a better way to represent objective energy usage?
Does ABFT still apply even with PARSEC thinned out?
Would an ultra simple way to define SN as: Storage+Compute+BlockDAG+ABFT be accurate?
Chisel this into infographic perfection. Update the original Dynalist as a deep dive comparison. Then make a documentary on Safe Network that takes all these elements and shows them visually with collective narrations. Inspired by the work of melodysheep on Youtube.
Updated graphic to fix check Score Errors and slight visual grooming
Updated graphic to include Holochain in DLT net. Also minor graphical formatting
“Social learning is critical to young elephants, who normally pick up successful behavior patterns from older, more experienced members of their herd. Without such role models, generations of ecological knowledge may be lost, leaving some elephants to improvise their survival strategies.”
Real quote from some lad on twitter: “By having Elders (masternodes) you create a permissioned system of oligarchic control”.
Dirty socialist oligarchic elephants!
This has to be the greatest sentence ever made
Edit. Anyone need a band name?
Fantastic work! Love it
I think it is worth add Filecoin (storage in production) and Fantom (async consensus in production) to comparison.
Could you please add a comparison of The Internet Token to this list, it seems to be a pretty much direct competitor to MaidSafe.