cryptohunter2
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
 |
February 09, 2016, 03:55:59 AM |
|
Storj guy here. All of the actor vectors you described are addressed in the our whitepaper or a blog post. 1) Sybil - Bonds and unique pieces 2) Illegal content - Greylists 3) Bandwidth vs storage - pay for both But TPTB is a genius and you are an imbecile. He is so smart that he can determine your cryptocurrency is broken, worthless, and doomed without even researching it or reading the whitepaper.  I feel sorry for all of the people that consider everything he has to say as the gospel, because he will certainly claim he is correct and never wrong.. apparently without even doing the proper research. This is the entire point though... how can the normal joe bloggs know what to think. TPTB certainly gives convincing argument (well from the small parts most can understand) and nobody seems to really challenge his points - mostly because it is way beyond the scope of the general board reader so they have no clue.... even seasoned well known devs and coders either agree with him or can never seem to convincingly point out he is dead wrong except perhaps one time and he acknowledged it and moved on without an issue. So all the other times they seem to meet headlong into each other it seems like a lengthy drawn out discussion where eventually the discussion seems at an end and I never really know what to think. I mean if he says these projects have issues then I get worried. If say cfb and monsterer and smooth agree then I guess it is very worrying. The thing is this. Can it work to a point we can profit from this price point and fail to be an ideal solution later down the road with out modification ( kind of like what some would argue btc is doing long term without being modified) or is it just a total bogus idea that will never function well from the start? Or is it fine? I'd love to see the trades the top coders or most knowledgeable cryptographers on here make at exchanges. Do any of the top coders here that don't work on these project hold any maid or storj? I have a little of both and do like the idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TalkImg was created especially for hosting images on bitcointalk.org: try it next time you want to post an image
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ArticMine
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050
Monero Core Team
|
|
February 09, 2016, 04:03:16 AM
Last edit: February 09, 2016, 04:18:15 AM by ArticMine |
|
Of course decentralized file systems are not compatible with the 19th century business models of the MPAA and RIAA, such as placing music on Edison Cylinders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonograph_cylinder and then distributing the Edison Cylinders by sailing ship. That does not mean however that decentralized file systems are doomed, what it does mean is that decentralized file systems will serve to further accelerate the demise of these 19th century business models, and the corporations that promote them. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 10, 2016, 04:59:26 AM
Last edit: February 10, 2016, 05:22:25 AM by TPTB_need_war |
|
Storj guy here. All of the actor vectors you described are addressed in the our whitepaper or a blog post. I read the white paper last week. 1) Sybil - Bonds and unique pieces
There is no way to do proof-of-storage that is robust. The only way is to make some assumptions about latency of propagation to a centralized copy of all files, but that can be gamed. Propagation is not proof. 2) Illegal content - Greylists
The Storj FAQ confirms these are opt-in, and not forced. Thus I maintain my point that the Storj protocol can become banned (refused) by Hosts (and even ISPs). We are moving into totalitarianism and increased government control over the internet. This direction of enabling theft of copyrights is begging for your project to be attacked and fail. 3) Bandwidth vs storage - pay for both
Pay how? Micropayments for each access to bandwidth? How to pay for storage when it is decentralized with unbounded replications and can be Sybil attacked. Sorry these decentralized systems are doomed. The concept can't work. The mathematical models are right there in the paper. We are collecting live data from the network, which proves the models are correct. "Its not going to work" in face of real data showing that is working is not going to cut it. Please provide some data or mathematical models that say otherwise. Latency doesn't matter for proofs. Testnets do not prove that the Sybil attack resistance and payment model economics work (because game theory is fully incentivized in the wild). Regarding case 1) in the quote above, the fact is the math models are often myopic[1] (and again that is so in this case), because it is impossible to prove proof-of-storage/retrievability: These proof-of-storage/retrievability algorithms also employ a challenge/response to force the node to have access to the full copy of the data which should be stored, but this does not prevent the node from outsourcing the storage to a single centralized repository. So to attempt prevent that centralized repository attack (i.e. Sybil attack on the nodes) these proof-of-storage/retrievability algorithms “try to use network latency to prevent centralized outsourcing, but [that is impossible because] ubiquitously consistent network latency is not a reliable commodity”.
Of course decentralized file systems are not compatible with the 19th century business models of the MPAA and RIAA, such as placing music on Edison Cylinders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonograph_cylinder and then distributing the Edison Cylinders by sailing ship. That does not mean however that decentralized file systems are doomed, what it does mean is that decentralized file systems will serve to further accelerate the demise of these 19th century business models, and the corporations that promote them. The political argument is irrelevant for as long as the technology and payment (economic) models are irreparably flawed, as I explained above. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 10, 2016, 06:53:22 AM
Last edit: February 10, 2016, 09:07:44 AM by TPTB_need_war |
|
I am proposing a solution. 1. The DHT (a distributed database keyed on file hash that returns a list of repositories of the file) should be an orthogonal protocol to the storage repositories protocol. The DHT can be stored on users' computers operating P2P over the users' home ISP connections. This is a low bandwidth protocol, so won't violate the asymmetry of upload versus download bandwidth physics for home ISP connections which I explained dooms Bittorrent. 2. Creators of files must have a means to record their policies (and also perhaps/optionally their verifiable identity). I have suggested that before they publish the file, they create a record in a block chain. Policies could include for example the crypto currency payment per download expected (this record could be updated on the block chain by the signer of the original record). To record a verifiable identity, I suggested including a SSL/TLS enabled URL and signing it with the public/private key of the site certificate, so that governments can blame the site owner for copyright infringements. If the URL is taken offline, then storage repositories should remove the file if they want to be compliant with government edicts (of course decentralized providers can do what ever they want). The protocol for the DHT could either honor (or not honor) the URL removals, so perhaps there should be two versions of the DHT so that at least the one that honors government edicts won't be banned by ISPs. Users could run both versions (if they can). Note afaik DHT consensus is like a block chain in that all have to agree (c.f. David Mazières' work on Steller's SCP consensus protocol and the venerable Kademlia DHT), or if not the DHT could be combined with a longest chain rule of a block chain to enforce a global consensus on DHT policies. 3. Of course payment policies can't be enforced on decentralized storage providers and it is impossible to prove that files have been served and the crypto currency payment to the creator wasn't enforced by the storage provider, but content creators can't stop download theft by decentralized repositories any way. Note that any storage provider that advertises that it violates policies can thus be prosecuted by the State (and note this new design encourages storage repositories to be hosted not run from users' computers), so in reality the warez shit will remain non-mainstream same as for Bittorrent (e.g. fraudster MegaFatKimDotCom shit will always be shut down by the State) because also note my point that the DHT can honor policies and thus without advertising the theft-oriented provider can't be located by users. The storage provider might also be charging a crypto payment for serving the file (and to fund its operation including the storage). So that solves the issue of how to pay for this system, because the irreparable concept of proof-of-storage/retrievability is discarded. 4. As for IPFS's concept of moving the cache of immutable content closer to the request (to reduce bandwidth consumption × distance), I think this can be handled by algorithms running on a layer on top of the DHT. So this provides the best of all worlds. We also stop the asymmetric consumption of upload bandwidth which Bittorrent is fucking up the internet with as I warned them in 2008. Note afaik that none of the decentralized file systems currently proposed (and in development or near release) are implementing the above correct design. That includes MaidSafe, Storj, Sia, IPFS/Filecoin, etc.. I have emailed to Juan Benet, the creator of IPFS, a link to this. Edit: so MegaFat deployed the fraudulent profits from reselling copyrighted content to buy himself a filipina prostitute[mail order bride] Monica Verga that he saw in FHM magazine (which btw is also technically illegal but mostly unenforced):   |
|
|
|
ArticMine
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050
Monero Core Team
|
|
February 10, 2016, 11:53:20 PM |
|
...
The political argument is irrelevant for as long as the technology and payment (economic) models are irreparably flawed, as I explained above.
I am proposing a solution. 1. The DHT (a distributed database keyed on file hash that returns a list of repositories of the file) should be an orthogonal protocol to the storage repositories protocol. The DHT can be stored on users' computers operating P2P over the users' home ISP connections. This is a low bandwidth protocol, so won't violate the asymmetry of upload versus download bandwidth physics for home ISP connections which I explained dooms Bittorrent. 2. Creators of files must have a means to record their policies (and also perhaps/optionally their verifiable identity). I have suggested that before they publish the file, they create a record in a block chain. Policies could include for example the crypto currency payment per download expected (this record could be updated on the block chain by the signer of the original record). To record a verifiable identity, I suggested including a SSL/TLS enabled URL and signing it with the public/private key of the site certificate, so that governments can blame the site owner for copyright infringements. If the URL is taken offline, then storage repositories should remove the file if they want to be compliant with government edicts (of course decentralized providers can do what ever they want). The protocol for the DHT could either honor (or not honor) the URL removals, so perhaps there should be two versions of the DHT so that at least the one that honors government edicts won't be banned by ISPs. Users could run both versions (if they can). Note afaik DHT consensus is like a block chain in that all have to agree (c.f. David Mazières' work on Steller's SCP consensus protocol and the venerable Kademlia DHT), or if not the DHT could be combined with a longest chain rule of a block chain to enforce a global consensus on DHT policies. 3. Of course payment policies can't be enforced on decentralized storage providers and it is impossible to prove that files have been served and the crypto currency payment to the creator wasn't enforced by the storage provider, but content creators can't stop download theft by decentralized repositories any way. Note that any storage provider that advertises that it violates policies can thus be prosecuted by the State (and note this new design encourages storage repositories to be hosted not run from users' computers), so in reality the warez shit will remain non-mainstream same as for Bittorrent (e.g. fraudster MegaFatKimDotCom shit will always be shut down by the State) because also note my point that the DHT can honor policies and thus without advertising the theft-oriented provider can't be located by users. The storage provider might also be charging a crypto payment for serving the file (and to fund its operation including the storage). So that solves the issue of how to pay for this system, because the irreparable concept of proof-of-storage/retrievability is discarded. 4. As for IPFS's concept of moving the cache of immutable content closer to the request (to reduce bandwidth consumption × distance), I think this can be handled by algorithms running on a layer on top of the DHT. So this provides the best of all worlds. We also stop the asymmetric consumption of upload bandwidth which Bittorrent is fucking up the internet with as I warned them in 2008. Note afaik that none of the decentralized file systems currently proposed (and in development or near release) are implementing the above correct design. That includes MaidSafe, Storj, Sia, IPFS/Filecoin, etc.. I have emailed to Juan Benet, the creator of IPFS, a link to this. ... The political argument becomes relevant when it is proposed to incorporate the failed business models of big copyright into the Maidsafe blockchain. My take is that the Maidsafe community will have enough common sense to not make this mistake. By the way ThePirateBay is alive and well after over 12 years despite the failed efforts of big copyright and one can type into the "Pirate Search" and download all sorts of perfectly legal and non copyright infringing content. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 10, 2016, 11:56:51 PM |
|
...
The political argument is irrelevant for as long as the technology and payment (economic) models are irreparably flawed, as I explained above.
I am proposing a solution. 1. The DHT (a distributed database keyed on file hash that returns a list of repositories of the file) should be an orthogonal protocol to the storage repositories protocol. The DHT can be stored on users' computers operating P2P over the users' home ISP connections. This is a low bandwidth protocol, so won't violate the asymmetry of upload versus download bandwidth physics for home ISP connections which I explained dooms Bittorrent. 2. Creators of files must have a means to record their policies (and also perhaps/optionally their verifiable identity). I have suggested that before they publish the file, they create a record in a block chain. Policies could include for example the crypto currency payment per download expected (this record could be updated on the block chain by the signer of the original record). To record a verifiable identity, I suggested including a SSL/TLS enabled URL and signing it with the public/private key of the site certificate, so that governments can blame the site owner for copyright infringements. If the URL is taken offline, then storage repositories should remove the file if they want to be compliant with government edicts (of course decentralized providers can do what ever they want). The protocol for the DHT could either honor (or not honor) the URL removals, so perhaps there should be two versions of the DHT so that at least the one that honors government edicts won't be banned by ISPs. Users could run both versions (if they can). Note afaik DHT consensus is like a block chain in that all have to agree (c.f. David Mazières' work on Steller's SCP consensus protocol and the venerable Kademlia DHT), or if not the DHT could be combined with a longest chain rule of a block chain to enforce a global consensus on DHT policies. 3. Of course payment policies can't be enforced on decentralized storage providers and it is impossible to prove that files have been served and the crypto currency payment to the creator wasn't enforced by the storage provider, but content creators can't stop download theft by decentralized repositories any way. Note that any storage provider that advertises that it violates policies can thus be prosecuted by the State (and note this new design encourages storage repositories to be hosted not run from users' computers), so in reality the warez shit will remain non-mainstream same as for Bittorrent (e.g. fraudster MegaFatKimDotCom shit will always be shut down by the State) because also note my point that the DHT can honor policies and thus without advertising the theft-oriented provider can't be located by users. The storage provider might also be charging a crypto payment for serving the file (and to fund its operation including the storage). So that solves the issue of how to pay for this system, because the irreparable concept of proof-of-storage/retrievability is discarded. 4. As for IPFS's concept of moving the cache of immutable content closer to the request (to reduce bandwidth consumption × distance), I think this can be handled by algorithms running on a layer on top of the DHT. So this provides the best of all worlds. We also stop the asymmetric consumption of upload bandwidth which Bittorrent is fucking up the internet with as I warned them in 2008. Note afaik that none of the decentralized file systems currently proposed (and in development or near release) are implementing the above correct design. That includes MaidSafe, Storj, Sia, IPFS/Filecoin, etc.. I have emailed to Juan Benet, the creator of IPFS, a link to this. ... The political argument becomes relevant when it is proposed to incorporate the failed business models of big copyright into the Maidsafe blockchain. My take is that the Maidsafe community will have enough common sense to not make this mistake. By the way ThePirateBay is alive and well after over 12 years despite the failed efforts of big copyright and one can type into the "Pirate Search" and download all sorts of perfectly legal and non copyright infringing content. Note my proposal around having two versions of the DHT is to let the free market decide. Any one who is for freedom should not try to force their "wisdom" on the free market. PirateBay is not mainstream. If you are determined to only impact 0.01% of the $50 trillion annual global economy, then you don't have the ambition I have. There are billions of people who need our assistance via our technological progress. Only a fool neglects that because of selfish ideology. |
|
|
|
CoinHoarder
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1026
In Cryptocoins I Trust
|
|
February 11, 2016, 03:56:28 AM |
|
Storj guy here. All of the actor vectors you described are addressed in the our whitepaper or a blog post. 1) Sybil - Bonds and unique pieces 2) Illegal content - Greylists 3) Bandwidth vs storage - pay for both But TPTB is a genius and you are an imbecile. He is so smart that he can determine your cryptocurrency is broken, worthless, and doomed without even researching it or reading the whitepaper. I feel sorry for all of the people that consider everything he has to say as the gospel, because he will certainly claim he is correct and never wrong.. apparently without even doing the proper research. This is the entire point though... how can the normal joe bloggs know what to think. TPTB certainly gives convincing argument (well from the small parts most can understand) and nobody seems to really challenge his points - mostly because it is way beyond the scope of the general board reader so they have no clue.... even seasoned well known devs and coders either agree with him or can never seem to convincingly point out he is dead wrong except perhaps one time and he acknowledged it and moved on without an issue. So all the other times they seem to meet headlong into each other it seems like a lengthy drawn out discussion where eventually the discussion seems at an end and I never really know what to think. I mean if he says these projects have issues then I get worried. If say cfb and monsterer and smooth agree then I guess it is very worrying. The thing is this. Can it work to a point we can profit from this price point and fail to be an ideal solution later down the road with out modification ( kind of like what some would argue btc is doing long term without being modified) or is it just a total bogus idea that will never function well from the start? Or is it fine? I'd love to see the trades the top coders or most knowledgeable cryptographers on here make at exchanges. Do any of the top coders here that don't work on these project hold any maid or storj? I have a little of both and do like the idea. He gives good technical analysis, and I wish he would just stick to that. However, he tries to pass as an expert in all facets of business, marketing, speculation, cryptocurrencies (which are much more than simply technical analysis), etc... no one is a jack of all trades no matter how much they try to convince themselves as such. Then he injects his personal opinions (ideological, political, etc.) into his "technical" arguments which largely discredits the "technical" arguments he is making (since they are not purely technical and are at least partially based on opinion.) Then he tries to act as if his conclusions are not at least partially based on opinions, but are purely based on facts, and there is no way he's wrong since they're based on facts. You don't see many people "challenging his points" because no one wants to waste their whole day arguing with him. He will literally argue with you all day (if you want) since he's so stubborn, knows everything about everything, and you are an imbecile. I am happy I made it to his ignore list... I have so much free time now.  |
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 11, 2016, 04:11:31 AM |
|
Spinmasters are short on facts and long on spin.
|
|
|
|
CoinHoarder
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1026
In Cryptocoins I Trust
|
|
February 11, 2016, 04:27:56 AM |
|
Spinmasters are short on facts and long on spin.
Please point out the factual errors in my post mr. "ima ignore u" There is evidence ITT of you marrying your technical analysis with opinion.... as you often do, just more subtly. |
|
|
|
|
pereira4
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1183
|
|
February 11, 2016, 01:07:27 PM |
|
Maidsafe is a fantastic project, I have been following it for a while, it's apparently older than BTC. Im glad to see that it's moving, even if slowly. The migration to Crust is being a success and we will soon have a functional release.
Maidsafe uses the same principle than Freenet but improved a lot, and I don't see how Freenet has been banned since if the network is really small, it still works, so Maidsafe will be even better. I have seen TPTB discrediting almost everything. I want him to go to the safecoin forums and try to argue with david irvine and the rest about those supposed Maidsafe's "fatal flaws", meanwhile im just buying more during this correction because it hasn't even begin to pump, the coin is just too damn undervalued.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 11, 2016, 01:17:22 PM |
|
...I want him to go to the safecoin forums and try to argue with david irvine...
Send David Irvine over here so he can prove his is not afraid to debate me. I will not debate him in his own forum where he has moderation control. I will slaughter his arguments if he comes here, so you can expect he will not. I am not at all afraid of him. Bring it on! Instead he will stay in his controlled spinmaster ecochamber where he can preach to the faithful. I have watched him on video. I know what I am dealing with in him. Let him try to debate about that nonsense about anonymity in MaidSafe (or has he abandoned that claim by now?). |
|
|
|
pereira4
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1183
|
|
February 11, 2016, 01:27:40 PM |
|
...I want him to go to the safecoin forums and try to argue with david irvine...
Send David Irvine over here so he can prove his is not afraid to debate me. I will not debate him in his own forum where he has moderation control. I will slaughter his arguments if he comes here, so you can expect he will not. I am not at all afraid of him. Bring it on! Instead he will stay in his controlled spinmaster ecochamber where he can preach to the faithful. I have watched him on video. I know what I am dealing with in him. Let him try to debate about that nonsense about anonymity in MaidSafe (or has he abandoned that claim by now?). But you are the one making such claims, you should be the one that has to defend them and prove the developers wrong. I don't think they would shut your thread down if you are respectful about it, but if you have a show off stance they might, but I have seen other people make criticism on the forum and no one has deleted the threads. It's not the same creating a thread saying "I think Maidsafe has X flaws" than saying "Maidsafe is doomed!!!". |
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 11, 2016, 01:32:22 PM |
|
...I want him to go to the safecoin forums and try to argue with david irvine...
Send David Irvine over here so he can prove his is not afraid to debate me. I will not debate him in his own forum where he has moderation control. I will slaughter his arguments if he comes here, so you can expect he will not. I am not at all afraid of him. Bring it on! Instead he will stay in his controlled spinmaster ecochamber where he can preach to the faithful. I have watched him on video. I know what I am dealing with in him. Let him try to debate about that nonsense about anonymity in MaidSafe (or has he abandoned that claim by now?). But you are the one making such claims, you should be the one that has to defend them and prove the developers wrong. I don't think they would shut your thread down if you are respectful about it, but if you have a show off stance they might, but I have seen other people make criticism on the forum and no one has deleted the threads. It's not the same creating a thread saying "I think Maidsafe has X flaws" than saying "Maidsafe is doomed!!!". It is his choice whether he wants to come here to debate me or not. No one is paying me. I only post here and rarely in Reddit (and recently in the Zcash forum only because I am formerly AnonyMint so I have a historical obligation on the anonymity issue). I am actually trying to stop posting. So I think what I have stated upthread is already sufficient. If anyone wants to debate me on the facts, then do it. I am reading. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 11, 2016, 09:13:07 PM |
|
2. Creators of files must have a means to record their policies (and also perhaps/optionally their verifiable identity). I have suggested that before they publish the file, they create a record in a block chain. Policies could include for example the crypto currency payment per download expected (this record could be updated on the block chain by the signer of the original record)...
Seems Bryce Weiner @ Unobtanium claims to be working on something like this. |
|
|
|
|
owm123
|
|
February 12, 2016, 03:24:12 AM |
|
hasn't it it already launched? Coin is available to trade at polo?
|
|
|
|
|
Cryptotraider16
|
|
February 12, 2016, 11:27:06 AM |
|
Guys what you think where can finish maidsafecoin price? Can its ever hit 1$ ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
hiddensphinx
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1457
Merit: 1001
|
|
February 16, 2016, 04:08:06 PM |
|
how much hdd space will I need to run the SAFE client software
|
|
|
|
KingZee (OP)
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 910
Merit: 452
Check your coin privilege
|
|
February 21, 2016, 12:52:38 AM
Last edit: February 21, 2016, 02:06:37 AM by KingZee |
|
hasn't it it already launched? Coin is available to trade at polo?
Yes the coin is available for trade. But the software is just getting its "MVP" (Minimal Viable Product) released now. We're finally getting to the testing phase. Then the testnet will run, devs will fix whatever bugs and add whatever features needed, and finally we'll end up with the actual product and the SAFE Network going live. how much hdd space will I need to run the SAFE client software
The software doesn't require tremendous space as you would think. I don't know the exact size, but I doubt it'll exceed a bunch of MBs. As for farming, the more HDD space you have, the more percentage of the network you have, the more coins you'll get depending on the network. But right now it's just the beta phase, so if any coins are implemented in the testnet they'll be worthless. |
Beep boop beep boop
|
|
|
|
Jiggy0001
|
|
February 22, 2016, 12:21:48 PM |
|
2. Creators of files must have a means to record their policies (and also perhaps/optionally their verifiable identity). I have suggested that before they publish the file, they create a record in a block chain. Policies could include for example the crypto currency payment per download expected (this record could be updated on the block chain by the signer of the original record)...
Seems Bryce Weiner @ Unobtanium claims to be working on something like this. You lost my attention after you posted this crap... Bryce weiner is on of the worst in crypto land... |
|
|
|
|
|
