or perhaps I am being too hard on the idea. Instead if you all want I can add blockchain to tiddlywiki and sell NFTs pointing to wikis that I made, like the original twederation wiki or the interaction fiction wiki.
On Monday, May 10, 2021 at 10:54:03 AM UTC+2 Jed Carty wrote: > Yes, the central question is could blockchain be useful to tiddlywiki. And > so far the only answer has been to use it as a proof of existence by > storing what is in one blockchain (file hashes in git) in a different from > in another block chain. > > Also, traceability in a blockchain is guaranteed only for events that > happen on the blockchain, not for what the blockchain is supposed to > represent. It is always open to any sort of manipulation at the human > interface side. I could start a car tracing block chain, and I could add > 10000 cars to it saying that I own them. That has no bearing on the real > world without some mediating central authority, and with a mediating > central authority the blockchain is redundant. > > People keep saying 'I am not familiar with the technology' and then > arguing against someone who has studied the theory and technology that goes > into blockchains in academic, hobby and professional capacities. The blind > faith in the unchangeable nature of a blockchain is a huge security risk to > anything that uses it. It is worth repeating over and over: all the > guarantees are just for the numbers stored on the computer, there are > absolutely no guarantees about what those numbers represent. All the > traceability claims completely fail when it gets to the data entry into the > blockchain. > > After working with some startups I am very familiar with how easy it is to > separate people from large sums of money by making magical claims that > aren't backed up by reality, investment in a technology and the actual > utility of the technology don't correlate. > > And as far as smart contracts go, never sign a contract you don't > understand. Someone with my skills would be able to make a contract that > does whatever I want it to do and have it all be essentially invisible to > someone who isn't intimately familiar with the technology that goes though > the code line by line to verify every part of it. > As as example: > https://kf106.medium.com/how-to-sleepmint-nft-tokens-bc347dc148f2 > > For ip protection, if Sony (or any other large monied entity) wanted to > claim ownership of anything I have created I would bet on their money and > lawyers over any proof I have of ownership every time, regardless of what > proof of ownership I have, no matter how impossible it is to counterfeit. > > But, all of that is off topic, to address the original topic, there are > three questions that need to be answered: what, how and why. > Why is easy, because it could be interesting. So we don't have to worry > about that. > What is the important one that hasn't been answered aside from a legally > untested method for proof of ip ownership. And that isn't a method for > tiddlywiki so much as just an option using external tools. And given what I > know, I would never accept a hash stored on a blockchain as the only proof > of a claim if there were any significant consequences related to it. > It is impossible to answer how without answering what first. > > So, what would any blockchain technology do in tiddlywiki? Without that we > may as well say 'should we incorporate Ingenuity flying on mars into > tiddlywiki?' No one is going to claim that Ingenuity isn't important or > worth paying attention to, but what does the question even mean? It is just > gibberish without some idea of what 'incorporate' would involve. > > This is the exact same question as before and it needs an answer before > there is any chance of discussion other than playing buzzword bingo. Like > what does 'a blockchain of secure tiddlers' mean in practical terms? > > On Monday, May 10, 2021 at 3:07:54 AM UTC+2 TW Tones wrote: > >> Mart, >> >> I applaud your raising blockchain as a possible integration to >> tiddlywiki. >> >> I spent some time researching the technology, but I could not build an >> instance, nor am I an expert, however some thoughts; >> >> I think it could be a good technology to make use of with tiddlywiki, >> especially since it does promote secure sharing, unalterable "documents" >> and cutting out the middlemen (which is some ways a feature of tiddlywiki), >> >> Perhaps the first application I can see is if there were a way to publish >> selected tiddlers into a blockchain, effectively small documents. A range >> of features not possible in standard tiddlywiki would then become available >> to tiddlywiki users and designers. In this case we would look at a >> providing secure, certified shared information services via such a >> blockchain and to users of tiddlywiki. Plugins and utility data could be >> published to the blockchain for public access and private tiddlers for >> security `between wikis and wiki users. >> >> Now this somewhat simplified description of a block chain of secure >> tiddlers could actually generate a wide number of seriously powerful >> solutions, by keeping it to a simple set of enabling blockchain >> technologies linked to the tiddler. I have cultivated a creative side to my >> use of Information Technology and can imagine many possibilities, but I >> will not extrapolate for know asI hope others may contribute ideas >> unaffected by what I think. >> >> As a person concerned with environmental damage I would be keen not to >> develop a mining process that costs so much computing power as just bitcoin >> is already using a substantial percentage of total world computing and >> power resources. I am not sure what this means for our possible uses. >> >> Regards >> Tones >> >> On Sunday, 9 May 2021 at 19:26:17 UTC+10 Mat wrote: >> >>> @inmysocks >>> >>> That's a very sober approach - but/and which I don't think anyone has >>> contradicted. My question is; *could *blockchain somehow be of value >>> for TW? I would not be surprised if it could, especially for aspects that >>> we currently disregard or dismiss for TW. After all, TW is very generic so >>> one way of looking at the question is if there are non-TW use cases that >>> where blockchain is advantagous or even critical, and only *then* ask >>> if TW could be incorporated and bring value in that context. >>> >>> Interestingly, you question the value of blockchain tech per se and >>> identify a single use case (NFT's for collectable toys). I didn't intend >>> for this thread to go there but I guess it's run its course so: >>> >>> I can see many use cases where blockchains make sense: One general area >>> is "traceability". For example a *car blockchain* that tracks ownership >>> of cars, their mileage, repairs etc. Or a housing registry. Makes a lot of >>> sense to me. I can also see how central banks / nations would want full >>> control over their money flows. Here's >>> <https://www.winnesota.com/blockchain>a use general case for >>> "logistics" and explanation for why blockchain tech supposedly is perfect >>> for it. If nothing else, the article should make it clear (at least to me) >>> that it can be difficult to see the use of blockchain if one doesn't >>> actually know of the needs for the particular business. Other than >>> traceability, blockchains also bring the smart contract aspect that cuts >>> out middle men for transactions. A pretty big deal and potentially an >>> enormous money saver. And, if nothing else, at least the potential for >>> decentralized control of things should resonate with TW folks. >>> >>> Disclaimer: I know very little about blockchain tech but it is becoming >>> a mature technology and there's billions USD poured into it... so there has >>> to be *something *to it, I figure... >>> >>> <:-) >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/aabe2554-c4a2-405d-9c99-d56440474f7en%40googlegroups.com.
