| 21 Aug 2021 |
 matthewcroughan - nix.zone | I also don't know what academics have to do with my opinion :P | 03:36:51 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | Anyway, check out what you can do with SCION if you get time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KO-YP7rkHA | 03:37:52 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | No need for BGP or hub-and-spoke. Just the best path through a network. No IP addresses. | 03:38:21 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | * No need for BGP or hub-and-spoke. Just the best path through a network. No IP addresses, use your own addressing scheme. | 03:38:35 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | You have full control over the route taken to deliver your traffic. | 03:39:32 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | * You (the client) have full control over the route taken to deliver your traffic. | 03:39:40 |
 dash | every society, organization, and network is controlled by a group of people much smaller than the whole | 03:41:15 |
| dash | this is normal | 03:41:26 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | No reason it needs to be normal in software. | 03:44:57 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | IMO. | 03:45:05 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | I mean, that's the whole point of protocols. | 03:48:54 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | Once they're out there, it's not gonna change, and if you design the protocol with user power in mind, it stays that way. | 03:49:12 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | E.g Bitcoin. | 03:49:15 |
 6aa4fd | In reply to @matthewcroughan:defenestrate.it
E.g Bitcoin. bit coin is incredibly majoritarian, you can forge ledger entries if you control 51% of the miners, that is just not a good example | 04:01:49 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | Which is why it has never happened in its history.
| 04:04:47 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | It's also 33%, not 51%. | 04:05:22 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | Additionally, any decentralized system has the same limitation, it's basically physics. But I'm convinced you don't know what it means after your statement on it :P | 04:05:52 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | You've given me a percentage. Can you tell me how many participants there are in the network? | 04:06:23 |
| 6aa4fd | i just think it's silly that you are upset about people being majoritarian about truth, and then celebrating a system that determines the accuracy of the ledger by consensus of the majority, how is one an example of the user or person being absent their rights, and another an example of user freedom and autonomy | 04:07:27 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | I'm not upset. | 04:07:33 |
 Emelie | In reply to @matthewcroughan:defenestrate.it
You've given me a percentage. Can you tell me how many participants there are in the network? How many of those participants are under direct or indirect control of the CCP? | 04:08:01 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | I think you're mixing the two things up though, I'm really referring to centralized control. | 04:08:08 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | In reply to @em:queersin.space
How many of those participants are under direct or indirect control of the CCP? IDK, you can't tell me either. | 04:08:20 |
| Emelie | No, but my point is just that a large pool of participants doesn't automatically make something decentralized | 04:08:54 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | Concensus of occurrence of transactions is not the same as the majority of people believing that brushing their teeth prevents cavities. | 04:09:26 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | If the majority of people believe that brushing their teeth prevents cavities, it doesn't actually mean it's true, for example | 04:09:54 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | Whereas in the case of a transaction, the point of consensus in the case of a blockchain is indivisable proof that a transaction occurred, according to all the input energy of the proof of work | 04:10:41 |
| 6aa4fd | In reply to @matthewcroughan:defenestrate.it
Concensus of occurrence of transactions is not the same as the majority of people believing that brushing their teeth prevents cavities. well sure, but it just strikes me that you are trying to build analogy between political authoritarianism, Habermasian public reason, and the engineering of computer networks, and i think the applicability of that kind of frame is incredibly limited | 04:10:47 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | In joules too. To undo a bitcoin transaction you must input just as many joules of energy as it took to make it. | 04:11:02 |
| matthewcroughan - nix.zone | Which is really the only reason it's secure at all. | 04:11:13 |
