[Cryptography] Interesting discussion of Web 3.0 ...

[Brad Klee]

Hi Theodore,

Thanks for the response and congratulations on /dev/random, a great
physics idea that is helping people understand entropy.

> It doesn't deal with computers as atoms because one of the core
> arguments of the essay is that users don't want to run "servers".

This is what I call "one side of the debate". The other side is that people
do want to run servers, especially to have fun doing "calculations" with
their friends. The example I gave was Marc Stevens, and for clarification,
here is the reference:

https://www.win.tue.nl/hashclash/
https://twitter.com/realhashbreaker/status/1279169091916439552

If you consider TLS as start of Web2.0, I guess hashclash makes a
reasonable endpoint on the timeline, but business trends take a while
to catch up to innovation. In the meantime, we have seen a cancerous
progression from payment gateways to employment gateways to slave
gateways, which should be limited from going any more toward evil.
Web2.0 has to stop somewhere, but what to expect next?

> It's really irrelevant whether you're talking about a $10,000 Intel XEON
> server, or a $200 Intel NUC server; both are still... servers.

Did you mean "relevant" instead of "irrelevant"? Then I would agree with
you. Not everyone is backed by an institutional super-budget, but many
are curious what's out there in the computational multiverse.

> Which means you have to be responsible...

Agree, and would say that "maintaining as work" is a very popular
perspective on the service side.

> But who is going to *run* these servers?  . . .  It's similar to . . .

Hopefully not one person. If the neighborhood is smart enough,
there could eventually be numerous candidates up for election.
Sorry, I found your analogy biased. What about solar?

> If it miner can mine some kind of crypto currency or NFT . . .

Not at all what I'm talking about. How about mining through various
strata of algebraic sphere curves for interesting examples whose
period metric ODEs condense at probable singular points?

> If that's a requirement, for your glorious crypto vision, I'd suggest
> that you consider how to make that a reality first, from an
> economically competitive standpoint.

Ad hominem@!  It's not my vision. Nor is it always glorious when I'm
looking out at colleagues in Russia, Ukraine, and China. A business
idea would be to make easily deployable, pre-purposed NACs, and
prioritize development of security features so p2p communication
doesn't need to be clandestine. If this industry takes off, perhaps add
a feedback loop for writing documentation and an update to mailman
adding a desperately-needed pastebin (hopefully with an option for
pw protection).

Thanks for your response. Have a nice day,

--Brad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20220113/d1ba82ae/attachment.htm>