hawkett says: Enforcement is most often something the lender does. If the loan recipient doesn't pay up, then that is a bad debt, and the lender analyses this risk when assessing the candidate. The people repossessing houses are employed by the bank, not the government. True, the law is there to support this - but that was the question - do you plan to legislate against credit, or are you expecting its demise to be a natural outcome of the economic collapse? In general if you legislate against something people want, then it ends up on the black market - e.g. enforced by thugs with baseball bats. The point is you need stop people wanting to give and receive credit to get rid of it. I'm not sure I understand the data mining point - perhaps its possible for your system to stop credit within it, but credit transactions will be undertaken outside your system while there is supply and demand for it - an alternative economy.
The only reason they can do that is that they have a law that allows them to do so. If no laws allows them to do so it is illegal and then they can face retribution. When you use a system, let's say a Gmail account you agree to something (that thing that no one read and which is called an EULA or whatever.) When you agree to use that currency you agree that you won't use credit. If you break the EULA then the service provider disconnect you from the system. So there are two point: If you make a loan and the 'bank' won't let you repossess the assets of your customers you are in deep trouble. If we find a transaction with no good and services to justify it we have to conclude it is a credit. Even the guy with the baseball bat needs an economy: he will think twice before he uses it. As far as credit outside whatever you want but we have scientific evidence which show that whoever will chose another system will have to regret it at some point. But look it is a free market. People can and do have email accounts that allow for SPAMing, they just can't do that with Gmail. The difference being that once you chose to use the 'spamming account' you won't be allowed into 'GMail'. Like everything in life or in economy it is a matter of free choice. On 25 May 2010 12:15, hawkett <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am an economist not a dreamer: a credit is a contract. The willingness > to > > sign it is based on the belief that it will be enforced. > > If there is no enforcement of such a contract I bet you $1 that no body > will > > do enter that kind of contract. Moreover I don't have to explain how data > > mining can help spot a transaction that is not a regular economic > > transaction but a credit. > > Enforcement is most often something the lender does. If the loan > recipient doesn't pay up, then that is a bad debt, and the lender > analyses this risk when assessing the candidate. The people > repossessing houses are employed by the bank, not the government. > True, the law is there to support this - but that was the question - > do you plan to legislate against credit, or are you expecting its > demise to be a natural outcome of the economic collapse? In general if > you legislate against something people want, then it ends up on the > black market - e.g. enforced by thugs with baseball bats. The point is > you need stop people wanting to give and receive credit to get rid of > it. I'm not sure I understand the data mining point - perhaps its > possible for your system to stop credit within it, but credit > transactions will be undertaken outside your system while there is > supply and demand for it - an alternative economy. > > > I am not worried if a few thousand of password or account were broken > into > > we can insure that. > > The problem is a system wide breach like the provider exposing or > destroying > > data. > > This is the subject we are dealing with. I don't believe in fixing a bad > > solution I believe in designing a good system > > then implementing it. If people use that system and it fails no one will > be > > willing to listen to my excuses. > > You're talking about the difference between a waterfall project > methodology and an iterative project methodology. Your 'design, > implement, finished' approach sounds attractive, but is usually > significantly less effective than an iterative approach when > developing software. > > When you talk about preventing against a system wide breach, if you > take on the work yourself - then *you* need to be responsible for > preventing against total breach or total loss of data - the problem > doesn't go away if you do it yourself. This is a massive undertaking > - even if you had an army of low costs resources - a project can only > improve efficiency so much no matter how many resources you throw at > it. If you are talking about a global currency system, then it will be > a target for attack. > > My point is that I doubt you can start from scratch and build a cloud > platform that has the scalability, security and reliability > characteristics you are after, and convince your customers that you > have done so. Building it yourself doesn't sound like a good risk > mitigation strategy to me. For the position you are in, it would seem > the cloud is the right choice, and the risks you can't mitigate you > have to be prepared to cope with - tell your customers what the risks > are - 'It's on Google, but your account number is encrypted'. No > venture is guaranteed to succeed. > > > You are asking me questions you never asked your banks: why do you hold > me > > to a higher standard than your banks. > > I thought I only scratched the surface. The questions I ask are ones I > would expect a bank - actually not even a bank - to ask of > themselves. Banks do ask these questions - and more besides. Which > ones in particular do you feel were unnecessary for your project? > > On May 24, 10:29 pm, Keren Or Shalom <[email protected]> wrote: > > hawkett said: > > > > When you say credit free currency, do you mean credit free society? > > How do you plan to make it credit free - through legislation? What's > > to stop me lending some currency I have in your system to someone - or > > making a purchase on their behalf in exchange for a purchase by them > > of something more valuable at a later date? That scenario is > > essentially an interest bearing loan. The system and those that use > > it exist in a symbiosis - you can't change one without addressing the > > other - it's hard to see how you will create a credit free society > > without addressing the psychology of the people within that economy - > > people need to *want* to avoid credit, and when you haven't got much, > > and others seem to have so much, credit is an insidiously attractive > > proposition - it's easy to market and sell. You'll probably need to > > address the gulf between rich and poor, and marketing of impossible, > > unaffordable goals to remove credit from society - perhaps you feel > > that economic collapse will do that. Does your plan deal effectively > > with the reality of the flawed, selfish human being? I guess I'm > > asking about your second point - is it based on a global societal > > enlightenment occurring due to the economic collapse? > > > > I am an economist not a dreamer: a credit is a contract. The willingness > to > > sign it is based on the belief that it will be enforced. > > If there is no enforcement of such a contract I bet you $1 that no body > will > > do enter that kind of contract. Moreover I don't have to explain how data > > mining can help spot a transaction that is not a regular economic > > transaction but a credit. > > > > On 25 May 2010 00:25, Keren Or Shalom <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Please make your remarks shorts and focussed: > > > > > I will answer to all I have received but break them down to something > we > > > can digest: > > > > > hawkett said > > > > > A small issue if the economy goes down the drain on the scale you are > > > talking about is that an internet where everyone has the capability to > > > connect to a cloud system is going to be difficult to maintain. It's > > > not going to be easy for google to make money, for individuals to pay > > > their internet bills, for internet companies to continue to deliver > > > access - indeed you may find it difficult for yourself to make money > > > or pay for the developers you are proposing to hire. What value will > > > money have? How will google pay its employees to continue to deliver > > > app engine - ad revenues are going to plummet. I think if your system > > > is anticipating the total collapse of the economy, then you may find > > > it difficult to deliver your system to what remains. > > > > > It all depends on how much my system can create demand: you are > reacting > > > just as if the previous system didn't existed and we stayed in a > vacuum. My > > > system is designed to feel the vacuum. > > > > > On 24 May 2010 16:08, hawkett <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> @gops this style of system is the holy grail of distributed systems, > > >> however the model you have suggested perhaps suffers from lack of > > >> redundancy. If only you have your data (or some of your data), and > > >> only you have access to it, then failure at that point represents > > >> total loss. The solution is a network of trust and redundant copies of > > >> your data and multiple people with the capacity to access it. The > > >> biggest problem we have with this solution is bandwidth and network > > >> latency. Keeping copies of data in different locations is expensive > > >> on both those fronts - especially if you want decent consistency, and > > >> especially between your computer and my computer. Another problem is > > >> that if publicly available data on your node is popular - then you > > >> need massive resources to be able to meet that demand - as you noted, > > >> a problem is the need for you to maintain your node. Perhaps the data > > >> distribution you mention is intended to solve these problems. > > > > >> For many classes of application, the cloud is actually the best we can > > >> do at the moment with the state of technology. Companies like google, > > >> amazon etc. *do* distribute data like this. However to solve the > > >> bandwidth and latency issues that come with the need for good > > >> consistency, they need to manage the clusters. I expect that one of > > >> the major reasons google is pushing hard for better bandwidth and > > >> lower latency for everyone is to expand the possibilities for this > > >> type of architecture. It won't be too long before our web browser is > > >> also a web server. I don't doubt that this forms a large part of the > > >> vision for Chrome OS. Another huge help will be getting people > > >> comfortable with eventual consistency. > > > > >> One of the key future applications of the social web is the > > >> application of networks of trust that allow us to distribute data to > > >> trusted nodes - the best people to store redundant copies of your data > > >> are the people you trust personally. It sounds like the guys on that > > >> link you posted are really pushing the boundaries of this stuff. > > > > >> Resistance is futile :) > > > > >> On May 24, 12:52 pm, gops <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > @hawkett last line was the perfect answer to @keren. > > > > >> > instead of making a central system on cloud , designing a software > > >> > that is very highly distributed using highest encryption standard is > a > > >> > way to go. > > > > >> > on some level , people athttp://www.joindiaspora.com/aredoing that > > >> > thing at social networking level. ( personally i dont think doing > this > > >> > on top of other http or https protocol is good idea. even > > >> > though creating/defining protocol is hard work , it should be done > > >> > directly on top of tcp/ip level. ) > > > > >> > that way, i own my own server at my own location with my own data > > >> > fully encrypted and accessible only to me. then i delegate > > >> > data through defined protocol to other person or system ( be it a > > >> > company , a bank , a friend , a community etc.. ) with different > level > > >> > of data and security access. same way, other system, > > >> > users and bank etc will delegate their data to my server to similar > > >> > encryption channels. > > > > >> > distributing data this way will remove "scalability need" > altogether. > > >> > and application complexity will reduce dramatically as they do not > > >> > have to take care of 1000's of connection or users. but it will > arise > > >> > problem for myself to maintain my server , will force to learn a new > > >> > software etc and learn the system, may be your own private virtual > > >> > server is a new commodity of the future. > > > > >> > my two cents. :D > > > > >> > On May 24, 4:08 pm, hawkett <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > > A small issue if the economy goes down the drain on the scale you > are > > >> > > talking about is that an internet where everyone has the > capability to > > >> > > connect to a cloud system is going to be difficult to maintain. > It's > > >> > > not going to be easy for google to make money, for individuals to > pay > > >> > > their internet bills, for internet companies to continue to > deliver > > >> > > access - indeed you may find it difficult for yourself to make > money > > >> > > or pay for the developers you are proposing to hire. What value > will > > >> > > money have? How will google pay its employees to continue to > deliver > > >> > > app engine - ad revenues are going to plummet. I think if your > system > > >> > > is anticipating the total collapse of the economy, then you may > find > > >> > > it difficult to deliver your system to what remains. > > > > >> > > When you say credit free currency, do you mean credit free > society? > > >> > > How do you plan to make it credit free - through legislation? > What's > > >> > > to stop me lending some currency I have in your system to someone > - or > > >> > > making a purchase on their behalf in exchange for a purchase by > them > > >> > > of something more valuable at a later date? That scenario is > > >> > > essentially an interest bearing loan. The system and those that > use > > >> > > it exist in a symbiosis - you can't change one without addressing > the > > >> > > other - it's hard to see how you will create a credit free society > > >> > > without addressing the psychology of the people within that > economy - > > >> > > people need to *want* to avoid credit, and when you haven't got > much, > > >> > > and others seem to have so much, credit is an insidiously > attractive > > >> > > proposition - it's easy to market and sell. You'll probably need > to > > >> > > address the gulf between rich and poor, and marketing of > impossible, > > >> > > unaffordable goals to remove credit from society - perhaps you > feel > > >> > > that economic collapse will do that. Does your plan deal > effectively > > >> > > with the reality of the flawed, selfish human being? I guess I'm > > >> > > asking about your second point - is it based on a global societal > > >> > > enlightenment occurring due to the economic collapse? > > > > >> > > If you don't have much money to back this venture then a few > points > > >> > > stand out > > > > >> > > 1. The cloud is *much* cheaper than any custom hardware > installation > > >> > > you can come up with. Security isn't just data security - you need > to > > >> > > manage backups, uptime, support, maintenance, facilities, > redundancy, > > >> > > disaster recovery - long list of stuff that will cost you buckets > > >> > > before you even get started. > > > > >> > > 2. You need to do some risk assessment. There are always risks, > and > > >> > > many of them - there is no perfectly secure system, and it is > > >> > > important not to try and sell such a thing. It is just a matter of > how > > >> > > you rate each risk, and important that the stakeholders understand > the > > >> > > risk and agree to it - the last thing you want to have is a > > >> > > conversation where someone says 'You told me it was secure!!!'. It > > >> > > can't be secure unless it is truly inaccessible to everything and > > >> > > everyone, and you can't build a system around that :). Risk > assessment > > >> > > is generally > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<google-appengine%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. > > -- V07768198309 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
