Redecentralize

rendering its UI, and no other privileges. This solves the data-containment issue. The User-Agent behaviors and HTTP messaging handle the question of IPC between the Citibank page and the Mint worker. Typed links are used to export/discover the interfaces between those two threads. I don't attempt /...\ Since we guarantee (by a simple, yet clever rule how permissions might be assigned) that no person can impersonate any other, > The trust question I'm investigating is application-integrity during third-party extension. Autonomy means, in this case, freedom to introduce new software without the host's blessing /...\ vendor. Like an OS, the effectiveness will then rely on a well-designed permissions model. I see.  This is basically the same question we had to solve when looking into "how do those nodes run application code?". Askemos - being only the protocol level - just goes

Since we guarantee (by a simple, yet clever rule how permissions might be assigned) that no person can impersonate any other, > The trust question I'm investigating is application-integrity during third-party extension. Autonomy means, in this case, freedom to introduce new software without the host's blessing /...\ vendor. Like an OS, the effectiveness will then rely on a well-designed permissions model. I see. This is basically the same question we had to solve when looking into "how do those nodes run application code?". Askemos - being only the protocol level - just goes /...\ autonomy" piece caught my interest. After all, it's what >> askemos.org is about. >> >>> If anybody has questions on the approach, feel free to ask; I'll post >>> a few more articles in the near future

This Yahoo group can be a useful measure of relative progress. It raised some pretty good questions in this thread already: does commercial infrastructure inherently benefit from centralised models? Does there need to be a new type of "open peer-based corporation”? Or rather, how important /...\ order to produce work of similar quality than the centralised models one intends to replace? To me it also evoked a more general question — why do we believe that current attempts at decentralised infrastructure will fare any better than the previous generation? What knowledge have we gained since then /...\ feross@feross.org> wrote: > More P2P in unexpected places :) https://peercdn.com/ Now acquired by Yahoo. That speaks to their funding model (cf my questions above.) On 31 Dec 2013, at 01:12, Jeremie Miller <jeremie.miller@gmail.com> wrote: > my best take on what happened was none of that tech

which the Page is most-privileged, and all Workers are given least-possible privilege. Deciding which participant is the Page is mainly a question of who should be trusted with the information. In the Citibank/Mint example, you'd never want Mint to be the Page, but you could potentially have /...\ single entity reachable via HTTPS as it is the normal case these days. In case (A) mint and citibank would be equivalent wrt. the question which one embeds the other.  In case (B) it would always be mint.com doing the embedding. The embedding itself however would not require /...\ However that would happen before the resulting HTML is feed into the browser for display/interaction. The User-Agent behaviors and HTTP messaging handle the question of IPC between the Citibank page and the Mint worker. Typed links are used to export/discover the interfaces between those two threads

Martin Dittus < martin@dekstop.de > wrote: This Yahoo group can be a useful measure of relative progress. It raised some pretty good questions in this thread already: does commercial infrastructure inherently benefit from centralised models? Does there need to be a new type of "open peer-based corporation /...\ order to produce work of similar quality than the centralised models one intends to replace? To me it also evoked a more general question — why do we believe that current attempts at decentralised infrastructure will fare any better than the previous generation? What knowledge have we gained /...\ wrote: > More P2P in unexpected places :)   https://peercdn.com/ Now acquired by Yahoo. That speaks to their funding model (cf my questions above.) On 31 Dec 2013, at 01:12, Jeremie Miller < jeremie.miller@gmail.com > wrote: > my best take on what happened was none of that tech

HTTP" http://pfraze.github.io/2014/03/08/communicating-with-web-workers-using-http.html Askemos appears to solve trust in distributed application-state, correct? I'll need to read more deeply. The trust question I'm investigating is application-integrity during third-party extension. Autonomy means, in this case, freedom to introduce new software without the host's blessing /...\ That "autonomy" piece caught my interest. After all, it's what > askemos.org is about. > >> If anybody has questions on the approach, feel free to ask; I'll post >> a few more articles in the near future. >> >> http://pfraze.github.io /...\ practical point of view it also > looks much like the way we program our agents. > > However I'm left with one question: how does this relates to autonomy > from hosting organizations? > > Towards this end we require active replication of the "server

marketing departments (now there's a combination that fits like a glove) have engaged in social engineering forever. That's nothing new. Maybe the question is whether there are any new *solutions* to the old problems. Some combination of global instantaneous communication and digital storage might make it harder /...\ ship early method because you bootstrap based on existing trust networks rather than trying to construct a new one from whole cloth. The question is how to gather the existing information in a way that provides a good user experience. You can imagine something like Facebook: You need /...\ bitcoin/namecoin puts its trust in the majority as determined by processing power and solves the triangle by providing trust without centralization. An interesting question is what might we use instead of computing power to create a trust democracy that would allow the good guys to retain a majority. > This

On Aug 14, 2014, at 1:30 AM, David Geib < trustiosity.zrm@gmail.com > wrote: It

that sort of thing in those areas all the time. But I don’t think it’s a huge leap. The question Tsitsiklis/Xu were looking at was storage allocation in a distributed storage pool (or an idealized form of that problem). Their research was backed by Google /...\ without knowing *much* about what it is coordinating, via careful and clever use of cryptography. I was more interested in the over-arching theoretical question of whether some centralization is needed to achieve efficiency and the other things that are required for a good user experience /...\ hard to design. A god that knows > absolutely nothing can't contribute to the running of the system. So > perhaps the first question to ask when designing a BIG is, what > information is it acceptable for the BIG to know? Good point about metadata privacy

decentralization while fitting ourselves to a top-down, rigid institutional framework and attempting to curry the money of NGOs and companies. I ask these questions not to "trap" you, or even seeking for myself answers to them from you, just I guess hoping that questions like these will always /...\ then by all means one should help that community in doing so (no strings attached and always ceding all control to the community in question), but always with the lesson of (e.g.) recent Ladakhi history itself in mind. After all, in Ladakh specifically, we've seen

free society?<br> <br> There are four modes of communication we do, public/anonymous, private/anonymous, public/known, private/known. Now the question is which modes of communication should act like many systems and which should act like one system. Here is my thinking /...\ ahead. He will have an uphill battle in keeping it decentralized and in the communities control.<br> <br> And your question about market forces? My answer would be, what market forces? I don't believe the technologies are chosen because the market chooses them. An example

schrieb Paul Frazee: Got one question here: this seems to replicate data.  Does it protect against malicious updates too? It creates a verifiable log only -- the content of the messages is an application concern. We're looking at CRDTs to deal with convergence, but the systemic model for security /...\ Development Team"  ;-)  Ah, no "commutative replicated data type".  I love abbreviations.  Though I don't see how the operations in question could ever commute.  Either I got money before I can spend it or I can't spend it.  What am I missing? This

integrity. See also: > http://www.iang.org/papers/ricardian_contract.html for yet another > explanation of the same concept. > Yes, that is correct. > Question: Am I correct to understand that the "key" field serves > this purpose? > It is, indeed a unique identifier for the item /...\ hashing >> function). >> >> Does this make sense..? > > Yes, quite a lot. > >> Happy to answer questions and please remember, this is more an >> experiment in code. > > I fully understand that. See: in about 2000 I started coding

Wittenberger < Joerg.Wittenberger@softeyes.net > wrote: Am 04.09.2014 19:45, schrieb Paul Frazee: Got one question here: this seems to replicate data.  Does it protect against malicious updates too? It creates a verifiable log only -- the content of the messages is an application concern. We're looking at CRDTs /...\ Development Team"  ;-)  Ah, no "commutative replicated data type".  I love abbreviations.  Though I don't see how the operations in question could ever commute.  Either I got money before I can spend it or I can't spend it.  What am I missing? This

this was supposed to be a private message. (But hitting "reply" instead of "reply to list" sends it to the list anyways.) One more question: am I correct to understand that zerotier serves essentially the same purpose as cjdns? https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns Thanks /...\ schrieb "Jörg F. Wittenberger": Adam, I've got a question: … In this blog post you wrote: > I designed the protocol to be capable of evolving toward a more decentralized design in the future without disrupting existing users, but that's where it stands today

Wittenberger < Joerg.Wittenberger@softeyes.net > wrote: Am 04.09.2014 19:45, schrieb Paul Frazee: Got one question here: this seems to replicate data.  Does it protect against malicious updates too? It creates a verifiable log only -- the content of the messages is an application concern. We're looking at CRDTs /...\ commutative replicated data type".  I love abbreviations.  Though I don't see how the operations in question could ever commute.  Either I got money before I can spend it or I can't spend it.  What am I missing? This reputation system

this was supposed to be a private message. (But hitting "reply" instead of "reply to list" sends it to the list anyways.) One more question: am I correct to understand that zerotier serves essentially the same purpose as cjdns? https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns Thanks /...\ schrieb "Jörg F. Wittenberger": Adam, I've got a question: … In this blog post you wrote: > I designed the protocol to be capable of evolving toward a more decentralized design in the future without disrupting existing users, but that's where it stands

place where people can go to join or find out more? How do you steer the evolution of such a system? All of these questions are easier to answer for infrastructure than for public-facing products and services. Facebook, Google and Twitter sit on top of several layers of mostly /...\ very hard to design. A god that knows absolutely nothing can't contribute to the running of the system. So perhaps the first question to ask when designing a BIG is, what information is it acceptable for the BIG to know? Cheers, Michael On 02/08/14 00:07, Adam Ierymenko wrote

network to ignore them if or when they fall over or die. This addresses the "how do we get rid of you?" question from the blackboard slide in my talk. Also, I like your use of the word "feudal". I've been exchanging emails with /...\ skill - making ill people feel better)." Finally, you end with "in the meantime, please do your own hacking and ask your own questions". For this very reason I'm sitting in my shed on my 17th wedding anniversary hacking on the drogulus (I have a young family

this was supposed to be a private message. (But hitting "reply" instead of "reply to list" sends it to the list anyways.) One more question: am I correct to understand that zerotier serves essentially the same purpose as cjdns? https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns Thanks /...\ schrieb "Jörg F. Wittenberger": Adam, I've got a question: … In this blog post you wrote: > I designed the protocol to be capable of evolving toward a more decentralized design in the future without disrupting existing users, but that's where it stands

this was supposed to be a private message. (But hitting "reply" instead of "reply to list" sends it to the list anyways.) One more question: am I correct to understand that zerotier serves essentially the same purpose as cjdns? https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns Thanks /...\ schrieb "Jörg F. Wittenberger": Adam, I've got a question: … In this blog post you wrote: > I designed the protocol to be capable of evolving toward a more decentralized design in the future without disrupting existing users, but that's where it stands

single entity reachable via HTTPS as it is the normal case these days. In case (A) mint and citibank would be equivalent wrt. the question which one embeds the other.  In case (B) it would always be mint.com doing the embedding. The embedding itself however would not require /...\ However that would happen before the resulting HTML is feed into the browser for display/interaction. The User-Agent behaviors and HTTP messaging handle the question of IPC between the Citibank page and the Mint worker. Typed links are used to export/discover the interfaces between those two threads

identifier for the object, you can always proof it's integrity. See also: http://www.iang.org/papers/ricardian_contract.html for yet another explanation of the same concept. Question: Am I correct to understand that the "key" field serves this purpose? I'm a bit concerned about the inclusion of some public /...\ assuming no key collision vulnerability > in the hashing function). > > Does this make sense..? Yes, quite a lot. > Happy to answer questions and please remember, this is more an > experiment in code. I fully understand that. See: in about 2000 I started coding around similar ideas

autonomy from hosting organizations. That "autonomy" piece caught my interest. After all, it's what askemos.org is about. > If anybody has questions on the approach, feel free to ask; I'll post > a few more articles in the near future. > > http://pfraze.github.io/2014/03/08/applying-user-agent-behaviors.html After /...\ Askemos. From a practical point of view it also looks much like the way we program our agents. However I'm left with one question: how does this relates to autonomy from hosting organizations? Towards this end we require active replication of the "server" end, such that

tiring. Sure it does solve these things in some way.  It has to. It's just a well-known example. Got one question here: this seems to replicate data.  Does it protect against malicious updates too? It creates a verifiable log only -- the content /...\ schrieb Paul Frazee: > For some interesting reading, I'll refer you to Dominic's project, > https://github.com/dominictarr/secure-scuttlebutt . > > Got one question here: this seems to replicate data.  Does it protect against malicious updates too? To illustrate: I'm currently working on some simple payment

Many times there is no internet access, but in a few cases there is some limited (in bandwidth) connectivity available. Naturally, the question of "enabling the internet" comes up. Whether it be some educator or an elder in the village, they want to be aware of the benefits

folks Just a quick question, mainly to conference organisers: - Useful to know the URL of wiki/etherpad/sign-in arrangements etc. - A few guidelines on what etc you'd like to see from 'us' Thanks again, best regards Hugh -- http://www.hughbarnard.org http://www.twitter.com/hughbarnard http://www.big-wave-heuristics.com

included a blurb about the fund below - but read more about it here , and get in touch with me, Annie, if you have any questions at he...@socialtechtrust.org   ----------------------------- Tech to Unite Us  aims to demonstrate how tech can reach its transformative potential when

decentralized products I haven't looked at, and the ones I interviewed a year or two ago that have moved on a lot. Question for you all - what decentralized products do you actually use for real work or pleasure, regularly? Only one I'm using is Syncthing. And ironically

protect our privacy, if you want to know more, you can follow this https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en/ If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to ask. You can verify my public key here: https://keybase.io/pierreozoux

This question is similar to the one asked along the right-hand panel at http://redecentralize.org/ , but I'm especially curious as to  why  people want these apps decentralized. Surely Francis, Irina, and Ross have thought of some examples

shut it down) so wants to grow this slowly in a trust building kind > of fashion. > > > So, here's the question. How would you best engage in a conversation > with these communities? Note that we only deploy in places where there > is strong pull

Adam, I've got a question: Am 02.08.2014 01:07, schrieb Adam Ierymenko: I just started a personal blog, and my first post includes some thoughts I've wanted to get down for a while: http://adamierymenko.com/decentralization-i-want-to-believe/ In this blog post you wrote: > I designed the protocol

down for a while: http://adamierymenko.com/decentralization-i-want-to-believe/ Adam, your blog post interested me a lot. Best of luck with your efforts. One quibbly question: >efficiency, security, decentralization, pick two.  Assuming certain sorts of threats, decentralization contributes a lot to security. In those circumstances, your trichotomy

down for a while: http://adamierymenko.com/decentralization-i-want-to-believe/ Adam, your blog post interested me a lot. Best of luck with your efforts. One quibbly question: >efficiency, security, decentralization, pick two.  Assuming certain sorts of threats, decentralization contributes a lot to security. In those circumstances, your trichotomy devolves

entity may set items with this unique key (assuming no key collision vulnerability in the hashing function). Does this make sense..? Happy to answer questions and please remember, this is more an experiment in code. I'm currently working on the drogulus on the "rewrite" branch here

theory. Finally, on the subject of "manual intervention..." That manual intervention must by definition take place over some other network, not the network in question, since the network being intervened with may be compromised. It reminds me of Godel's incompleteness theorem. To intervene on behalf of a decentralized network

relevant things to say about that. > That manual intervention must by definition take place over some other network, not the network in question, since the network being intervened with may be compromised. In a theoretical sense that's true, because if the network is totally compromised, meaning no communication

part of why I like it. :) > > That manual intervention must by definition take place over some other network, not the network in question, since the network being intervened with may be compromised. > > In a theoretical sense that's true, because if the network is totally compromised

schrieb Nicholas H.Tollervey: >> Question: Am I correct to understand that the "key" field serves >> this purpose? >> > It is, indeed a unique identifier for the item. Great! >> I'm a bit concerned about the inclusion of some public_key here

very efficient or scalable. > Or... we are admitting that trust is inherently asymmetrical because of course it is! Nobody trusts everyone equally. The question then is whether people need to agree at the “meta” level on some common things that they all trust

wants to grow this slowly in a trust building kind > > of fashion. > > > > > > So, here's the question. How would you best engage in a conversation > > with these communities? Note that we only deploy in places where there

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with

schrieb Paul Frazee: > For some interesting reading, I'll refer you to Dominic's project, > https://github.com/dominictarr/secure-scuttlebutt. > > Got one question here: this seems to replicate data. Does it protect against malicious updates too? To illustrate: I'm currently working on some simple payment system

some interesting reading, I'll refer you to Dominic's project, >> https://github.com/dominictarr/secure-scuttlebutt. >> >> > > Got one question here: this seems to replicate data. Does it protect > against malicious updates too? > > To illustrate: I'm currently working on some simple

refer you to Dominic's project, >>> https://github.com/dominictarr/secure-scuttlebutt. >>> >>> >> Got one question here: this seems to replicate data. Does it protect >> against malicious updates too? >> >> To illustrate: I'm currently working on some

askemos.org (technical vs. "philosophy"). It is a sqlite full text search coming back with subject-predicate-object triples. Often quite useful. Questions are very welcome. I'm working on the documentation side now. (Enough feature creep already. ;-) Best /Jörg > > Dominic

time member of the research group that produces Tribler - I don't work on Tribler or Dispersy directly but I'm happy to field questions about the research. Cheers, Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJUEw8NAAoJEBEET9GfxSfMPaoH/i9j+giWOyrazgg9NEVr6Ayw DSW36i0SHqsd31axMwrdWhxcTp60fsGPW1H4JuXg2yIKOmwFSZcmuGvIkJk4Jeix 28MSmuut8bxtnZj6tR4oHSFSlK1oRnVSrXSZ8TU6ifPRKM1b19iF6UatKmd2DI5l 9SAHvtyNLob+QwH/sSFykg2866IZKO+R3fz5zbTbF02rXM843V4NqLNuYGGVuY8l lajtGYGrb/WUJA96Y7M0vL381vagycuGAq80HXpAf2eugFc/3sARVe/qnT5ywoQV snwjM2XR4M64FWPvF7h52d6pcmdw+Gg5vu7AbGkLPgNfswJofPJBk5kU3jMRO6Y= =x1IE

system will have to be really well engineered to minimise latency. Tor wasn't built with that in mind - and again, the question is who's going to pay an engineering team to build a decentralised anonymous voice network they can't profit from? > … that is unless someone

wiki.pirateparty.be/index.php/PP_Structure_Proposal#Three_Pirate_Rule - and we'd love more pirates.  Not understanding urbit might make you the perfect interviewer, you'd know what questions you'd want answered as a starting point. If you wanted to do a ~15m video interview, I'd second and help

wiki.pirateparty.be/index.php/PP_Structure_Proposal#Three_Pirate_Rule - and we'd love more pirates.  Not understanding urbit might make you the perfect interviewer, you'd know what questions you'd want answered as a starting point. If you wanted to do a ~15m video interview, I'd second and help

wiki.pirateparty.be/index.php/PP_Structure_Proposal#Three_Pirate_Rule - and we'd love more pirates.  Not understanding urbit might make you the perfect interviewer, you'd know what questions you'd want answered as a starting point. If you wanted to do a ~15m video interview, I'd second and help

Many times there is no internet access, but in a > few cases there is some limited (in bandwidth) connectivity available. > Naturally, the question of "enabling the internet" comes up. Whether it > be some educator or an elder in the village, they want to be aware

Many times there is no internet access, but in a > few cases there is some limited (in bandwidth) connectivity available. > Naturally, the question of "enabling the internet" comes up. Whether it > be some educator or an elder in the village, they want to be aware

there is no internet access, but in a > > few cases there is some limited (in bandwidth) connectivity available. > > Naturally, the question of "enabling the internet" comes up. > Whether it > > be some educator or an elder in the village, they want

used for the right thing. Unfortunately I cannot come. Really bad. I hope that there will be some discussions about the question: What do we really want to do? I think that the centralization of the net is a social issue. We are social animals. We go into the most

used for the right thing. Unfortunately I cannot come. > Really bad. > > I hope that there will be some discussions about the question: What do > we really want to do? > > I think that the centralization of the net is a social issue. I think

Same question :) On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Filipe Farinha < filipe@ktorn.com > wrote: Hi all, Will there be recordings or webcasts of the sessions? I'm hugely interested in following the event, but being in Macau makes it infeasible to drop by London on this occasion

could follow along from Norway! On Friday, 16 October 2015, Anish Mangal < anishmg@umich.edu > wrote: +1. Same question :) On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Filipe Farinha < filipe@ktorn.com > wrote: Hi all, Will there be recordings or webcasts of the sessions

very grateful if I could follow along from Norway! On Friday, 16 October 2015, Anish Mangal < anishmg@umich.edu > wrote: +1. Same question :) On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Filipe Farinha < filipe@ktorn.com > wrote: Hi all, Will there be recordings or webcasts

/2015/10/decentralization-cannot-be-marketed/  thanks :) Ira On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 at 09:55 Hugh Barnard < hugh.barnard@gmail.com > wrote: Hi folks Just a quick question, mainly to conference organisers: - Useful to know the URL of wiki/etherpad/sign-in arrangements etc. - A few guidelines on what etc you'd like to see from

thanks :)   Ira   On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 at 09:55 Hugh Barnard < hugh.barnard@gmail.com > wrote: Hi folks Just a quick question, mainly to conference organisers:   - Useful to know the URL of wiki/etherpad/sign-in arrangements etc. - A few guidelines on what etc you'd like to see from

There is not only a list of reasons why services gets centralized but also a list of questions what decentralize service to use instead. I think it would be futile to consent about a decentralize service only on this list. I think all of us would like

decentralised social network with advanced features, OK maybe there's no really adequate candidate for now (or maybe there is... this is not the question), but a mailing list... are you serious?! Regards, Adrien

category which should be taken into account is the question. "Do my friends use it". As more an more friends use Signal, I think it is worth trying. Communication technology that nobody uses accept me is not yet worth trying

seed, I recommend the "Featured Torrents" at the bottom of this page:  https://webtorrent.io/desktop Let me know if you have other questions. Cheers! Feross

librelist.com Ross. On 10 Dec 2013, at 01:45, Francis Irving < francis@flourish.org > wrote: Ross is the only person who can answer these questions I think

army officers used Whatsapp to organize their coup. Was bitmessage too slow? Or did they just use what everybody uses? I blogged about my questions. Sorry no good answers. http://www.sudelbuch.de/2016/06/04/redecentralize-the-web-why-and-how/ juh -- Das ZEN von Pandoc Bücher und E-Books einfach und professionell produzieren http://www.amazon.de

Francis Irving <francis@flourish.org> wrote: > > > Ross is the only person who can answer these questions I think :) > -- Do *you* have an awesome idea you never quite manage to do? http://www.awesomefoundation.org/en/chapters/liverpool/

Feross, quick question about this... Can WebRTC Data Channels natively speak arbitary protocols, so they can just implement the regular BitTorrent protocol? Or will existing BitTorrent clients need updating? Francis On Sun, Dec 08, 2013 at 03:31:00PM -0800, Feross Aboukhadijeh wrote: > Hey everyone! I think Redecentralize

attending drop me and/or Holger (cc'd) a line. Hope this makes things clearer and I'm more than happy to answer any questions you may have, Nicholas. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSzS1FAAoJEP0qBPaYQbb6ZCMH/1kr0bLh7mG8KMGxgxQu5FIv 1hVfc6qexgPIDsUcDyJ9RtTLLn6X5HRwZ97vYv/IyHN1RA0ap/6L8Azi6hvP0R3I btZB5yz+RTbSdmhY3cGyac1Mn5MvpuQbr2jwQioRebnm+8m1lzeJymlqsYW/M39Y 3mVvrhAV9OUHcs3GKGiFoPnhh0mlRdtf0bITnUYc/TtWaMK2lqhdegA9G6FMWYPI lM7b

webtorrent On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:09 AM, Francis Irving < francis@flourish.org > wrote: Feross, quick question about this... Can WebRTC Data Channels natively speak arbitary protocols, so they can just implement the regular BitTorrent protocol? Or will existing BitTorrent clients need updating? Francis

been wondering this too! I've asked a couple of related questions on Bitcoin.SE: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19006/what-protocols-are-built-on-top-of-bitcoin  (Mastercoin, Ripple?) http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19038/are-there-any-non-monetary-uses-for-the-blockchain-or-the-bitcoin-protocol-gene  (Anti-spam, proof of existence, voting.) Personally, I thought proof of existence seemed the most elegant and obvious-in-hindsight. I really like the idea

Jonathan Deamer < jonathandeamer@gmail.com > wrote: I've been wondering this too! I've asked a couple of related questions on Bitcoin.SE: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19006/what-protocols-are-built-on-top-of-bitcoin  (Mastercoin, Ripple?) http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19038/are-there-any-non-monetary-uses-for-the-blockchain-or-the-bitcoin-protocol-gene  (Anti-spam, proof of existence, voting.) Personally, I thought proof of existence seemed the most elegant

must trust your admin. It's a fundamental theorem of cryptography that "trusted third parties" are never necessary in any protocol. The difficult question is to build non-TTP protocols that are *efficient*. This is beyond my knowledge to prove, but it's out there if you do the research

Jonathan Deamer < jonathandeamer@gmail.com > wrote: I've been wondering this too! I've asked a couple of related questions on Bitcoin.SE: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19006/what-protocols-are-built-on-top-of-bitcoin  (Mastercoin, Ripple?) http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/19038/are-there-any-non-monetary-uses-for-the-blockchain-or-the-bitcoin-protocol-gene  (Anti-spam, proof of existence, voting.) Personally, I thought proof of existence seemed the most elegant

Thanks for answering my questions. I'll keep an eye out for updates from you guys. On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Adam Ierymenko < adam.ierymenko@zerotier.com > wrote: It's a bit of a grey area, but I really don't think

and/or Holger (cc'd) a line. > > Hope this makes things clearer and I'm more than happy to answer any > questions you may have, > > Nicholas. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSzS1FAAoJEP0qBPaYQbb6ZCMH/1kr0bLh7mG8KMGxgxQu5FIv

arkOS, which would be a great companion for upcoming XMPP server support. I read over your blog post as well, it raises some interesting questions. I'll have to read over it a second time before I'm able to fully digest it. Regards, Jacob Cook <jacob@peakwinter.net

arkOS, which would be a great companion for upcoming XMPP server support. I read over your blog post as well, it raises some interesting questions. I'll have to read over it a second time before I'm able to fully digest it. Regards, Jacob Cook < jacob@peakwinter.net

easy to defeat censorship of anything that those who propose allowing it to happen will just throw up their hands in frustration. So the question (one of many!) is how to present this in a way that makes sense to a lot of people. A lot more than currently

and/or Holger (cc'd) a > line. > > Hope this makes things clearer and I'm more than happy to answer > any questions you may have, > > Nicholas. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS1p0pAAoJEP0qBPaYQbb6GCgH/1WHmPfAk+lyAy8f4W+oKscy VpVxPIZ/UymR7hT3oaCLyCy6vcAMth1uNs6w5Rerb4dxsUbfiIPSVKGqhjTRv/zG MutqhqAtAHoXi9p6yPUwX4ZG7q4RU

shut it down) so wants to grow this slowly in a trust building kind > of fashion. > > > So, here's the question. How would you best engage in a conversation > with these communities? Note that we only deploy in places where there > is strong pull

must trust your admin. It's a fundamental theorem of cryptography that "trusted third parties" are never necessary in any protocol. The difficult question is to build non-TTP protocols that are *efficient*. This is beyond my knowledge to prove, but it's out there if you do the research

using so-called open source free code in my production code precisely because nobody owns it. I can't go back and ask them questions and have them be responsible for fixing bugs I inevitably find. If by proprietary you mean not-changeable-by-someone-else? Then

excuse to shut it down) so wants to grow this slowly in a trust building kind of fashion. So, here's the question. How would you best engage in a conversation with these communities? Note that we only deploy in places where there is strong pull from the field, since

Ross is the only person who can answer these questions I think

easy to defeat censorship of anything that those who propose allowing it to happen will just throw up their hands in frustration. So the question (one of many!) is how to present this in a way that makes sense to a lot of people. A lot more than currently

part of an architecture which supports social extension of web applications in order to provide autonomy from hosting organizations. If anybody has questions on the approach, feel free to ask; I'll post a few more articles in the near future. http://pfraze.github.io/2014/03/08/applying-user-agent-behaviors.html Be well, Paul

information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.   Whilst it may seem to trivialise human rights to attach them to the question of where your email is hosted, we have already lost more than enough ground in the past decade that strongly asserting our rights

list groups that were either in progress, or being born, but didn’t get very far with it. I guess my questions are: 1. Should we be making it easy to find Decentralization specific conferences/events/groups? Should it be part of the core purpose? 2. How should we implement