My question is indeed what is the point of money whether it is crypto or not. I know a little about bitcoin (proof-of-work: evil for climate so far) and Ethereum (algorithmic contracts, good idea as far as I understand, but still PoW).
The idea of a single source of thruth is neat, and would be useful to avoid lies or fakes in a distributed system.
Money used to be used a means of exchange something of value for the rich that is gold. That by itself shows how dubious money seems, because gold is almost useless in practice. Nowadays, money has mostly only virtual value, because people trust the system, and the people in power somewhat trust each other and they agree through the market on exchange rates.
Anyway, take of instance "carbon budget" of countries, it can be exchanged for money. And they that "carbon budget" can be used to produce new products.
With the money, a low carbon footprint country can bargain to buy some products.
During this exchange the low carbon footprint might have lost value because conditions of the exchanges and the dubbed added value to the products.
It is far fetched, but to me their should be no money, hence probably no crypto-money.
A single-source of truth is helpful, but I am not convinced it is necessary, and is certainly not necessary in a fully cooperative system with no evil.
Thanks including me in the convo.
They have locked down our ability to change most of the architectures because they know that cyber-powers and cyber-rights models are exclusively the consequence of those architectures, and they want to impose us their own models, by forcing us to play with their architectures, protecting their models, and therefore, their political and failing economical system, in essence, capitalism. Doing so, they are preventing a crypto-anarcho-communist revolution.
Here it is.
But in order to implement this at world scale, we obviously need alternative cyberspace architecture that offer the equivalent of blockchain functionnalities in its core, as a service, scalable to billions transactions per second.
And this cannot be clearly achieved with the current cyberspace architecture design and paradigm, not with current digital system architectural paradigm.
In such paradigm, every citizen would have a kind of multi-wallet attached to him, beside standard wallet and bank accounts, to count those credit left for him on those hundreds of "criterias", and he would not have the possibility to "recharge" a specific line with monay. In order to buy a good or service, citizen would be obliged to have credit left on all fields, beside having the money to buy the good or service. This incentively would force citizen to @zig @theruran @emsenn
By the way, homomorphic cryptography would be very usefull to help create a cyberspace architecture allowing to easily handle for each citizen the multi-wallet holding those hundred "credit lines".
It's typically a functionnality that would require to be provided at cyberspace architecture level in order to be scalable. And this is not possible with the current cyberspace architecture paradigm.
Cybernetics of trust cannot be achieved with current cyberspace.
@mouloud This kind of logic I presented you here is anarcho-communist compatible. It would lead to a money less and class less society, without fascism, just with incentive logic, but it can work only if it is incorruptible.
This is because such functionnalities, scalable, real time, can only be achieved with revolutionnary alternative cyberspace architectures, enabling such cybernetics of trust, that we advocate, as crypto-anarchist situationist, to change of
What is hard, and Theruran knows it, is how to ensure those fundamental blocks cannot be "hacked", and how to garantee they will really work as expected with no treachery possible. This is indeed what we are working on. Globaly, this is called cybernetics of trust, but it is also fulyl demilitarized as it is not hackable, there are no backdoors possible of any kind.
Yes, and about code - that is the kind of knee-jerk reaction that people have nowadays and it prevents everyone else from understanding what they are doing. Documentation of every kind is key, unlike the prevailing software engineering practices that lack rigorous conceptual design development phase. Visual documentation is also of course important, and to maximize the utility it must also be an executable architecture model.
Well - if we can theorize another way of achieving an equivalent security model and utility to Bitcoin without the energy consumption, that would be incredible. As far as I know, there is no alternative yet conceived and the energy consumption keeps the system honest. And unfortunately, no one I have met in the fediverse thus far is qualified to theorize such an alternative. There are real engineering constraints and trade-offs that are glossed over in these kinds of discussion, and I doubt that billions of transactions per second is achievable due to laws of physics. It is my expectation that such a decentralized and trustworthy cybersystem will be slower in many ways but is nevertheless fast enough for us to get real work done and not just mindlessly consume Big Media.
P.S. come to hackers.town - we got 10,000-character toots!
@theruran can be achieved when integrating this natively inti the cyberspace architecture itself. Time will tell. I'm still thinking about this and working on it, exploring possible native implementations a lot. I tend to mix DHT concept with PoW in a native mesh cyberspace architecture to do it for the moment, but I am exploring other possibilities too. Will tell if I find something promizing. @mouloud @zig
@theruran things become fun.... And new possibilities for simpler algorithms, and with less energy consumption than classical PoW become possible, to enable many of the current blockchains functionnalities, at rate reaching billions of operations per second. But the technological digital paradigm is radicaly different, we're talking about fully synchronous time sensitive digital systems and cyberspace architectures. So you see, I'm confident. @mouloud @zig
@theruran In such paradigm, simpler protocols, with fully distributed small mining capabilities in each node of a truly mesh cyberspace architecture, and within each microprocessor, can bring the time sensitive trust chain needed to replace the current blockchain implementation, with its energyvore mining. That's what I curently think.
It is called TrueTime
@mouloud @theruran @zig Being able to finaly manage perfectly time is an easy consensus we should be able to easily reach when it is to debate of what kind of new "functionnalities or services" to implement natively in an alternative synchronous cyberspace architecture. But in such paradigm, the whole technological stack and mesh cyberspace chain must be design oriented toward perfect synchronous time management, microprocessors and microprocessors based systems too.
@mouloud @theruran @zig Even for example, crime investigations, having a cyberspace that allow to backward events or transactions precilsely is something that is missing currently. Too many folks really misunderstood me about what I was meaning by crypto-anarchism (cybernetics of trust, enabling true anarcho-communist like societal alternatives), they thought it was crypto-libertarianism, that favor mafia and corruption, and don't favor or incite solidarity, social justice and peace.
@mouloud @theruran @zig Mastering cyber-powers and cyber-rights models, in a garanteed way, enforcing them, through well designed architectures, allows us to choose and fine tune our models, to in the end reach a peacefull crypto-anarco-communist society, without destroying individual liberties, or human rights. I have always been talking about sustainable and efficient global ballance of powers and cyber-powers. Contrarily to crypto-libertarians.
What I want to write has two sides a) I believe there is a slow, smooth path toward libertarian socialism. Stronger claim, it is the only viable path. I believe a brutal change is not possible. Feeding the "revolution" meme as in the french revolution of 1789 is counter productive. If anything like that would happen, that is again the people sitting at the first row that will be taking advantage of it like bourgeoisie has taken advantage of french revolution.
b) I agree there is a need to THINK about the new system but also the think about path toward that system. It is necessary to DOCUMENT and prove, if not necessary, at least that there is sufficient alternatives. And toward that goal, I am confident that one can not just reboot the system with a new operating system. That is, one need an upgrade path, and step by step hotfix, and swap existing cyber infrastructures with better ones.
I might be wrong, but I consider code to be XXI literacy. We can live without code and go back to caves or something. But if we want to human science, say medicine, to progress with need computers and code.
In other words, yes you can try to convince people with free-form text, and think about new socioeconomical systems. But eventually, people will go back to their usual routine business as usual privative tools.
Toward that goal I have been working on alternative "operating system" that is supported by a DHT.
It will allow to not only copy but also improve the user experience of the www.
So far my work has been concerned about offering better alternatives to mastodon, mediawiki and to some extent google search engine.
I have not touched yet, other aspects like factories, production chains, logistic and many others...
The idea of what is an operating system is completely skewed by the domination unix. What I know of plan9 does not bring much new things in that space.
Things like ocaps or distributed ocaps makes me think we, humans, could be locked up outside the "OS".
Like the rest, it is built on what sort-of works (coming from the past), that is itself biased toward reproducing or implementing known systems like hierarchy (conway law).
When I wrote unix, I meant inspired from unix, not necessarily forks. That is user-space, POSIX threads and processus, hierarchical file system, sh-like programming language to input commands, volatile vs. persistent memory etc...
We are biased toward what we already know.
I just feel like there won't be feasible ways of using this hardware in the future. Energy will be scarce, and manufacturing facilities will stop producing critical components such as the RAM. We will have piles of electronics with no manuals/schematics and not enough power to run them but for a short time anyway.
I lost the URL, but there is at least one project that aims to build a minimal OS that would be very easy to port to any hardware. Well, now that I re-think about it there is many such OS.
The conversation went into several direction. One of them is to create new hardware with the idea of supporting a non-kyriarchy.
I gotta think about that some more, but it falls within the scope. The silicon wafer manufacturing process being developed by #LibreSilicon is a key component.
I'm not sure what to do with the old hardware yet. The best I can think of right now is to use it to virtualize the system we propose.
Consider the path of no action - all that hardware will go to waste anyway. e-recycling is shit.
@theruran @xj9 @zig @mouloud May I ask here who is a true digital electronician engineer, with degree, and who realized all by himself at least one full motherboard with a microprocessor (not microcontrollers) like 68k family or equivalent with other trademarks (Needing lost of peripherals, interrupt manager, DMA logic, address decoders etc..) and who codes it embedded software entirely ?
@xj9 @zig @theruran @mouloud @xj9 How can't you see the point ? it is obvious : Too many integrated circuits backdoors (secret NSA ones, and official ones like Intel ME) and architectural backdoors (also called security breaches) published these last 3 years. Almost all current integrated circuits being closed source into black boxes.
@xj9 @zig @theruran @mouloud But this is not even the main issue. The main issue is that its hardware and microprocessors and integrated architectures are fixed, imposed, and this is greatly limiting what can be build with these legos and on top of them at software architecture level in a way you seem to have no idea. You are being forced to perceive code as solething exclusively running on a centralized turing machine.
@xj9 @zig @theruran @mouloud And this a much bigger limitation than what you seem to perceive. It is the biggest digital jail your mind is being trapped into, limiting your creativity for designing alternatives in a huiuuuuge way. You're been brainwashed by digital-creationists, also called US military "digital things" industrial complex.
@xj9 @email@example.com @zig @theruran @mouloud I'd love to have Edward Snowden having his voice heard on such matter. I'm sure he would agree with the angle view I am doing my theorical and applied researches on alternative cyberspaces architectures. I am caring about much more issues than you may think. With the highest ethic standards possible.
@mouloud It is not, indeed. I'm late on my prototyping just because I am under constant personnal physical and psychological attacks by several spying agencies or mafias not just because of my Antitrust case against the cartel of Amazon and Postal Operators in 8 countries, but also for my crypto-anarchist situationist studies and theorical and applied research that will change the statut quo. @xj9 @zig @theruran
@mouloud I guess you have all seen the movie "Die Hard 4". This time, on this specific one, I am almost certain the CIA and/or US Ministry of Defense wrote the scenario.
What do you think of the caractere gabriel in this fiction ?
Why did they painted him like this ?
And how did they painted the two hackers involved ?
Have you tried analyzing this ? It's consequences ?
Same kind of analysis are indeed
interesting with Mr Robot (By the way, I have still not seen the last season, and I should, to better understand CIA moves in the ream of the cyber-hacktivist scene worldwide) (Okay some gonna say I am obscessed with CIA moves, the thing is that the french almost produce no interesting movies about hackers, so the DGSE/DGSI interferences/propagand through fictions & cinema is harder to decode) :
Why am I suddenly ralking about those movies related to hackers is that they are clearly tools, for all states & their respective secret services, to inject propagand and influence masses, and the worldwide hacktivist scene itself.
It unveils other aspects of the secret military cyber or technological agendas most powerfull nations have in mind.
Studying duch things is not only a game all
intelligence analysts in all nations must do, it is also of a great interest for crypto-anarchists internationalists and universalists like me. I'm even convinced our analysis are more honnest than those paid intelligence military analysts because we force ourselves, this is our hacker and crypto-anarchist ethics, not to take side for any flag. They are no flags in true crypto-anarchism.
Now, let me come to the point about what I wanted to express here :
My "Die Hard 4" analysis of charactere gabriel is the following : "We (The CIA & US Military) acknowledge the current digital technological statut quo we mostly imposed to the world created cyber-chaos that is out of hand, but as we are still in a position of cyber-domination hegemony, we don't give a fuck, and we even find that
A bunch of technomancers in the fediverse. Keep it fairly clean please. This arcology is for all who wash up upon it's digital shore.