Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:43 AM, other.arkitech <other.arkit...@protonmail.com> wrote:
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 8:25 AM, Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi OA, >> >> I was thinking about how there are a lot of ongoing projects working hard to >> solve these various problems of replacing existing network infrastructure >> with an improvement, keeping users safe and empowering them, etc etc. >> >> There are a _lot_ of experienced software developers on these lists and many >> of us are kind of working in bubbles on our projects, often duplicating each >> others' work. >> >> Would you be at all interested in moving towards sharing effort and >> interoperability with others, even merging codebases if a roughly identical >> project were going on? > > Yes I am interested on the idea. > I like the bubble style because i think it is more efficient many times. A > head, a codebase. > Working on multiple products, (as many as devs), is the recipe for avoiding > conflicts and byzantine discussions, and generating an army of competitive > products. > It is great to exchange help, work, pieces of code, etc in a "I work for your > project and you work for my project" or something alike > > I'll be around : ) > > A really major current effort is gnunet https://gnunet.org/ which modularizes > p2p networking functions for reuse, as local services that provide them I > believe. It's very powerful but very few projects are using it; setup and a > verbose learning curve might be an entry barrier, unsure. > >> K >> >> On Mon, May 11, 2020, 6:40 AM other.arkitech <other.arkit...@protonmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. >>> >>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ >>> On Monday, May 11, 2020 9:56 AM, grarpamp <grarp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > I am not afraid of IP4, the resource is already scarce and their cost >>>> > provides a good measure against attackers that are not The Man. >>>> >>>> They have almost zero cost. Any retard can botnet hundred thousand >>>> of computers IP and proxy them ports all back to farm of pi's / emulators. >>>> Any govt can use all its thousands of worldwide residents >>>> embassy and military staffs to get worldwide IP's pools without even >>>> any sneaky attacks like abusing secret FVEY++ peers to give them >>>> IP proxy of unused addresses from networks too. >>>> >>>> But no, USPS cannot give user ability to overlay network exit for >>>> help ensure their privacy, because only IPv4 is "safe" for USPS. >>>> >>>> Bitcoin have many many privacy overlay users, even full mining nodes on >>>> overlay for their privacy, do you see it be not "safe" for Bitcoin network, >>>> any real incident of that, from even day one to now. >>> >>> This project is about solving the system: >>> A) without PoW, which consumes too much energy and induce to >>> centralization (network shrink) and territorial segregation forces >>> B) without PoS, or any other Po* I've considered during my design (e.g. >>> biased cryptoeconomy, e.g. PoS allows mining to those who have more wealth) >>> >>> I encourage you to find another available scarce resource that meets the >>> criteria of being unbiased and I'll consider it to be used instead of >>> taking advantage of the scarcity of IPv4 addresses. >>> >>> Additionally, all criticism towards USPS related to anonymity goes to a >>> proper overlay layer compatible with such rule. >>> Tor is not valid because is unable to apply the limiting rule. >>> I'll either propose a patch to Tor or develop an anonymity layer in the >>> future, near or far, depending on the priorities of every stage of the >>> project. >>> >>> Hope it serves. >>> >>>> >>>> > I am not scares about Govs too, since they haven't moved a finger yet >>>> > against bitcoin, even though they can. >>>> >>>> And if they do this network blocking of BTC and USPS, which will going >>>> to still be transact... only those on the overlays... which means BTC win >>>> USPS die, because USPS not allow user to use privacy overlay. >>>> >>>> > The public protocol do not need to be encrypted neither in Bitcoin not in >>>> > USPS. USPS is running encrypted today though. The fact that Tx or >>>> > consensus >>>> > protocol goes in clear doesn't affect the pseudaanonymity nor the >>>> > privacy. >>>> >>>> ??? Move to Thailand / China / wherever / everywhere that spies your >>>> network wire, builds nice big databases of everything you do on it, use >>>> Bitcoin to pay a cleartext tx from your photo ID IPv4 node physical address >>>> and Bitcoin address, to cleartext to some online market known Bitcoin >>>> address for some weed, or tx/rx a hello Tiananmen 1989 65 in blockchain >>>> message data field. Your ass is going to jail, be in database, for long >>>> time. >>>> >>>> In general, all coins should be encrypted and network overlay-able.
