We’ve had enough of digital monopolies and surveillance capitalism. We want an alternative world that works for everyone, just like the original intention of the web and net.
We seek a world of open platforms and protocols with real choices of applications and services for people. We care about privacy, transparency and autonomy. Our tools and organisations should fundamentally be accountable and resilient.
On Aug 1, 2014, at 9:02 PM, Steve Phillips <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > 3. For a year or so I've had a design for a zero-knowledge server that nonetheless implements partial search/querying functionality for anyone with the key. Perhaps this could also play some role in the ecosystem. I'll try to write something up. I've been thinking about that too, but I think it's important to take a step back and think through the problem. I really want to push through the Little Centralization Paper (Tsitsiklis/Xu) a little more. To me the key thing is this: Our hypothetical "blind idiot God" must be as minimal as possible. That's why I said "provably minimal hub." The Tsitsiklis/Xu paper gives us a mathematical way to calculate exactly what percentage of traffic in a network must be centralized to achieve the phase transition they describe, but they do not give us an answer for what functionality is required. Imagine a stupid-simple key-value store with PUT and GET. Each key has a corresponding public key submitted with it that can be used to authorize future updates of the same key. Keys expire after one year. That's it. Or could we go even more minimal than that? In Turing-completeness there are shockingly minimal systems that are universal computers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_instruction_set_computer