Traditional dist sys often borrow concepts from the real world & hence "unique identities" seems like a natural thing to do coz we're used to using identities to divvy up work & attribute faults/punishment. Nakamoto consensus is brilliant because it leapfrogs this mental block.https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/1099343107114524674 …
Indeed, identity is relationally local, insecure, and labor-intensive. It has poor social scalability.
-
-
AFAIK the idea of identity has such a strong appeal that it’s omnipresent in both regular software designs & network designs. Process ID in Linux, Android application ID. MAC address blacklist/whitelist, IP subnets based on address groups, etc.
-
In distributed networks in particular, I find that even early on researchers understood very well how redundancy improves network fault-tolerance/Quality-of-Service. But very often we’re stuck with the identity mindset because it’s so incredibly ingrained in the way we do things.
-
It turns out that we can achieve a high level of fault tolerance without any identities. Who would have thought of that! P.S. Proof-of-Stake systems bringing back identity to “punish” malicious actors is like deja vu all over again. Talk about reinventing the wheel.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This brings to mind Tom Etter's work I sponsored within my limited authority as part of HP's circa 2000 "Internet Chapter 2". The result, involved reviving Bertrand Russell's "Relation Arithmetic" which led to obviating set theory with a "Relative Identity Theory"...
-
An example of "relative identity" is in Heidegger's "as" that Ulam thought necessary to further advances in mathematical logic. For instance BankAccount(John=Mary) says John equals Mary "as" the owner of some bank account. All 3 items here are "identities"...
-
Set membership ∈ becomes isomorphic to the existential quantifier ∃ encoded as X(Y≠X). Then there is the algorithmic information manifestation which motivated my proposal that Wikipedia's change log be the corpus of a lossless compression prize to smoke out "identities"...
-
These "identities" would not be individuals but rather aggregations of entities that "act as one" with respect to various biases also known as "information sabotage". Philosophically, and in legal tradition, there is room here for treating "conspiracies" of individuals ...
-
as "legal persons", meting out collective punishment or reward. Such algorithmic information "identities" _might_ permit _some_ globalization of "identity", replacing labor intensive local work with the hard work of approximating the uncomputable Kolmogorov Complexity.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Weighting your chance to win a block by hashrate proves (identifies) the uniqueness of your mining equipment. Unlike PoS & Proof of hard drive memory, POW equip can't generate 2x more solutions per time.
-
I mean you can't get POW equip to generate more solutions/time w/o extra cost, but the bits proving PoS or hard drive existence can. There's some special about the capital in POW equip being tied up in *time* (it's not the waste) when compared to other forms of capital.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.