skihappy

分類目錄

想法

• Community managed software security model
• Ecosystem of communities

項目

評註

註解

• Negative cardinality is deficit of something, a task yet to be done. It has to do with sequence, then, and time. Really interesting
• What you getting to is what i call timebanking. You get community credits for time vested into community, for doing favors. Its same as money. Lets call 1hr of work a shenanogins dollar, S1. Then, you can say everyone in my community works for $50/hr. So, you got exchange rate of S1=$50. Of course, its simplified. All kinda mechanisms can be added to regulate the economy. But, the point of it, Money is born out of kindness, not debt as dollar does. That makes all the difference. How do we create such economies on large scale is another good subject. Thats what blockchain is for, a blank slate. We are all busy creating alternative economies on blockchain. We can create economic structures of freedom, self evolving, self governing, with a few lines of code. Still, we would be creating a bubble if it all revolved on the cloud. We need land, to build communities on the ground, to actually produce tangible goods and services, to actually help someone. So, i propose to create those bc orgs, daos, with a high moral goal of supporting such communes. I propose dedicating our org to distribute land Grants to deserving communities. Lets buy our planet back, at a good deal, since dollar is crashing against crypto. Nows the time to extend o ur bubble over the planet. Itll start as bubbles of sanity and kindness, creating seeds of new culture. Our online org tools and economic structures will guide thise communes to prosperity. Prosperity will gravitate others and the commie virus will spread, and the culture will flip, as we learn to share and to collaborate, all in the name of love and humanity. We will collectively evolve into a smarter collective being, thru our links over the web. Thats why im a web dev. Did you notice, this revolution does not destroy, but builds on previous success, and includes everyone, including trump
• Heres another way to look at that pickle. Our society, economic structure , is a graph, of relationships, links between people and orgs. Graphs have a really cool property. You can layer them up, by adding new nodes and links. Just adding new structure wo breaking the old one. And,... thats what i propose to do, to build new graph on top of existing one, wo breaking anything, using same people, maybe adding new parallel orgs, reusing the old ones, on individual basis. The people gonna decide how. All we need to do is provide the tools and, very important, the key, pass the vision. Just the tools not gonna do the job. We need to inspire, to light that fire, to plant the seed, to lose the greed, to love each other. Its not hard, everyone is ready. And, we are not special. That fire is getting started everywhere. We are one of many, and we honna merge, super quick, faster then control freaks can freak out.
• I like the idea. My friends are forming a DAO based on, seems like, similar ideas. Take a look at their intro. IINTRO The semi-sentient DA👾 uses land ownership and contract law to slowly gain control of all the vertically-integrated supply-chains required to host itself and all the workers it needs to survive and propagate. BOOT The DA👾 searches for Land suitable to build permacultured eco-villages. The DA👾 mints fungible 1 earthChange Coin for each ft² of Land. The DA👾 then auctions those earthChange to buy that Land. The total supply of earthChange is limited by ft² of Land. earthChange does not represent Land Ownership! START The DA👾 now issues Product Tickets as claims against Future Production. The DA👾 then auctions Product Tickets for Work Contract signatures. RUN You gain Land Ownership as you fulfill Work Contracts. Land Ownership preallocates Future Production to you. GROW Owners propose new Product Tickets to govern Future Production. Owners selling surplus should 'reflect' some profit to those users as land ownership. FORK Subgroups must be able to divide Land (draw borders) to localize control.
• btw, not every community has to be a land owner. Some can be distributed, digital warrior types. Those are the most likely to seed first startups on the ground. Just a thought. I know of many communes trying to form right now. They need help.
• I dont have all the answers, just a vision. No one has all the answers. Future is murky. Itll most likely develop in a different way. Yes, im sure its not entirely new idea. So what? Lets find those folks and collaborate. The more the marrier. Thats the whole idea, good ideas spread like wilfire precisely cos everyone has the same idea. Whats missing is the starting seed, by the true dreamers. The true dreamers are those that create the structure, then other dreamers populate the structure and evolve it. The tools i mentioned are needed. Thats a fact. People want to build communes. Thats a fact. They dont have an easy way to create online org structure, its expensive and labor intensive. Once we have tools to help them, all kinda fireworks will start happening. This is just one scenario. Yeah, itll be different,in each locale. We can overthink it to death and plan to smallest detail, and none of it gonna happen by that plan. We need to build those tools. Thats all I know. And we need to build those tools not in a vacuum, but for specific use cases on the ground, but we can easily start up on the basics, then adjust in applications.
• what about all those people, like [chronological] mentioned, those without land? How would they jump onto this intercontinental land-sharing joy? They would work for shares,to live on the land. Of course, anyone would be welcome, but they would be expected to be useful. Its not different then joining a commune right now. You go there, get to know folks. They decide if they like you or not. But, if we have a common monetary system, and people earn credits for doing useful stuff, and carry reputation with them as online signature, the process will become much easier, and we will be much freer. Dollar is kinda nice in a sense its so universally accepted. This will create the same kinda freedom, but community added as a bonus. Also,people will protect their reputation, for thats their ticket to freedom. Thats more valuable then money. Money might buy a plain ticket to exotic place,but youll get bored in a week or two. Much better to come and join a vibrant community as an honored guest. Money does not buy that. Your reputation does. No more crime and cheating. Not worth it.
• And another thing. When people do create these DAOs and orgs, they have little commonality and hard to link into a net of any kind. We really need some common tools,to organize on larger scale. Its not scalable right now. Thats a problem.
• yet another thought. People are best motivated by high moral goals. Freedom, democracy, community, sharing. That resonates. I propose to emphasise that,over potential monetary gaines. To create networks I see, we need to enspire with our visions. Then we empower by tools and roadmaps and examples. It almost does not matter if the roadmap will be repaved in some other direction. There are many ways to go. But we have to go in the general right direction. We can get something started, others will finish.
• heres another idea. A place where people can introduce their budding and existing communities,in a bloging kinda way, live diary style, to attract donors and investors. It can be another tool. Create your DAO, your org structure, and get known, all in one day. Done. A group of friends can get organized around helping local homeless folks or some other needed community service, and get supported and create a community, and join a global net, and actually build a village close by. The word will spread and itll take off. We can solve homeless problem, for starters. Actually, i have a strong feeling, by the time last homeless is housed, many other issues, including global warming, will be solved.
• interesting read about title tokens. Very informative. Thanks. Im not sure how relevant it is to here. Of course land titles will be registered legally somehow. Maybe, those member shares can be registered as partial ownership tokens. Maybe, it can be another layer outside of gov record keeping, valid only within the community, or wider community net. Im not sure it needs to be recognized by government.An org can be registered with authorities as official land owner. I dont know. Those are legalities. Someone can figure it out. Ill just keep writing my code. Whats important, once we figure it out, we can code it as a type and everyone in the network can use it.
• yes, theres no way around the state. Id love to know how members of the collective be assured of their ownership right. Asya, she donated that DAO sample, says they will form a land trust and sign community members as trustees. I dont know if shares can be recorded, but at some point we would have to start keeping our records,provided the state is satisfied. I rest my case for ignorance and lack of interest. Also, itll be different in each country. Thats why a network is helpful. There will be resources to solve these headaches, typical solutions provide by community, in form of code and recipes, and lawyers.
• Thats an excellent idea. Thats the premis of what im doing. Ill create another thread explaining my approach. But yes, everything can be modelled with funcs. Funcs and differential equations are equivalent. Quantum mechanics can be formulated thru funcs. Our programming languages and qm are very similar, imo.
• It can be abstracted in different ways. Relationships can be modelled as particle entanglements, funcs, analagous to qm. Reactive funcs constraining the state. But then, a constraining func can be represented as an object, with props as two particle refs, and a symbolic operand. Thats a descriptor of a link in graph. Now we got graph, and we can build and manipulate it graphically, in a low code development system Of course, there can be relationships between systems of particles, like many to many and one to many and all that. They are all entanglements. Any math experts? I need to classify a complete set of operands, to represent all ways to write constraining funcs, atomic style.
• Ok. I do tend to get fixated. I reread your idea. You suggest that everything is broken down into structure, which is arrangements of funcs, and each func is documented, and it can be seen how the things are build by examining the structure. Funcs are easy to document. How these funcs fit together into structure is another subject, dont you think so? Just initial thoughts. But i do like the idea of trying to organize knowledge into a sensible structure, with layers, where one can traverse functional scopes to zero in on specifics. It seems like a good idea, but how would it be different from existing practice. Be nice to have a sample. I think you talking about breaking up knowledge in atomic peices, each with its description. Is that right?
• I think competition is the problem. Its better to collaborate. Its more efficient by far, and takes care of all the problems you describe, and does not destroy people but upbrings everyone to prosperity. But, thats the wrong problem to be solving. You cant tell people, collaborate now. Not gonna work. Its the matter of changing dominant culture to a more sharing variety. I better stop here.
• Good idea about glossaries and links. A lot of times, by the time you done with glossary, not much left to describe. Can i use gfm format here. Can i link inside ssme doc, and have a glossary section? I dont do it simply for inconvenience. Thanks for suggestions.
• Is it not what a distributed nft does. We agregating a project from many accounts. I like to call it composition. I do think composition is the problem to solve, not just for storage concerns, but to manage complexity
• Perhaps, bc can be part of a solution. It can serve as an escrow service, regulated by contract. The tokens are not released till everyone is in agreement. It's just an impartial arbitrator. Exactly how it's services are used is a different subject, but it def would take humans and additional structure outside. I agree that by itself bc is not the solution, but it can be a part of solution. A set of typical solutions can be available to communities to follow.
• Currently, there's no way to run user scripts in the browser environment. It's possible to jail scripts into web workers, but not anything that manipulates Dom, like react components. Perhaps, a clever way can be found, but it def would lack performance and would be disconnected from the rest of node ecosystem. No one will be willing to rewrite npm modules to fit that standard. Also, there's never gaurantee that a back door will not be found defeating the whole jail scheme. This is where browser tech is standing now. Perhaps, there will be a native browser sandbox at some point.
• Thank you. So, a vm would run on a central server? We are designing a serveless architecture, with kernel code coming from cdn, bc is the database supplying modules as scripts. Do you suggest running a vm on client system? Maybe. Perhaps they would have to spend a few mins to cash vm code.
• ''There are already a lot of code quality metrics, that code can simply be filtered by: support of versions of language, presence of documentation, syntax quality, not to speak of test coverage, testing pipeline definitions, stars, collaboration metrics, pull requests, community activity, comments on code, etc., that I think, can indicate a lot of issues, unless there is an intelligent malicious actor, that knows all that, and intentionally introduces security vulnerabilities, for which such community vetting and reviews would be useful. However, I think, this could be achieved by a more discretionary starring and following decisions by the renowned engineers. Maybe a special kind of badge could be introduced, that is only usable by the community members of certain track record, and only after provided reviews. I agree. What I envision is a low code builder available to non devs thru browser, to script modules in a low code way. Most will be drag and drop, but there will be some simple js funcs. A testing system can be introduced later. The problem is, the low code opens door for much wider range of people, with plenty more bad actors. If we make hoops too narrow, we defeat the purpose of accessing that wide range of people. I'm mostly concerned about intelligent bad actors, the cheaters, after your wallet types. A low code system lowes that intelligence threshold, unfortunately
• We could introduce a simple virtual machine language that can execute the primitives a vast majority of distributed apps require and a simple secure runtime that limits arbitrary communication with other machines The problem is with view layer. No vm will have access to browser Dom. There's already a web worker api that can be used to execute funcs, but we'd like to give users ability to script react components. I can see how to separate html from state logic, and jail that logic to web worker, or a vm. The problem, who's gonna learn some weird api to write those components, and who's gonna rewrite all components available on npm.
• Perhaps you have a UI where you create a room of people and the people in the room you can communicate arbitrarily with. So you can't create random sockets with websites and steal data. You can't open files either. Only query the distributed database. I think it's my idea of a testnet, where you limit access to trusted users. Your code is jailed into testnet till it's reviewed. I don't see an easy and performant way to allow a vm to safely manipulate Dom. I'd like to use well known tech like react. Even pure html string is not safe, even if all state logic is separated into a func and is run in vm or webworker
• Perhaps the frontend layer is simply that - the programmer can use any React code they want and the browser does the sandboxing. Could be hosted on localhost by the distributed server application which hosts the various distributed apps. Wouldn't be very secure because the site could make HTTP requests. I would have a simple JSON API for talking to the distributed network and querying the database. You could have a content security policy to ban HTTP requests. Hmmm. Interesting. You mean localhost would do server rendering and serve just html? Even html is not safe. Something to consider. We coding an mvp, just prove of concept for now, wo security considerations. But we def need solutions. Personally, I don't think any of sandboxing schemes are totally trustworthy. There's gotta be a review process, even to assure quality of modules, besides security. I think, somewhere humans need to get involved. Making their job easier is another subject, worth discussing
• I mean we don't do any sandboxing at all on the frontend and just treat the distributed app as another website. The security to the distributed network is in the distributed app runner running in the background. That app decides what the app can do. Maybe need some console UI to approve actions that the frontend is doing. I really appreciate your thoughts but im not following. The problem is untrusted scripts running in the browser context. All kinda identify theft and spying is possible a f not careful. The app kernel can not police what people contribute to the net. Another control mechanism is the permission system, but that's not perfect either. Who's assigning permissions and to whom? It would be helpful to large degree, but it can not weed out all bad actors.
• It seems trust in some central authority is involved. There would be an arbitrator, and we would get judged again and cheated on. We had enough of that.
• I like that. So, if I understand right, there would be nodes hosting those hub servers, and some table of server addresses available to all clients. Maybe, those servers existence can be made dynamic Maybe, a framework can be developed to convert any app into a distribution serveless app?
• Good idea. However, I'd like to use this to find a community to join. Looking for a job is a very depressing proposition, but that's what the web is full of. It's very telling that no one is framing this issue in terms of community search. Granted, it'll do the same search using same or similar constraints, but using different lingo. Language is all we got to shape and express our thoughts
• I like it
• I agree, but I think it's more of a cultural issue rather then technical, as most of the problems worth solving. I picture a society of semi nomads, freely moving thru the land held in common, joining many available communities, where everyone is accepted, learning at each place, as well as teaching. Kinda like a human flux thru a more stable matrix of community nodes. I imagine life as a fun road trip, in anticipation of new friends and new experiences, travelling light, worry free. That's what freedom is to me. But such a vision would take a cultural shift. As of now, yeah, we can create an accommodation sharing app, there are already many, like time shares. So, of you have lots of money, we can make moving even more convenient. Unfortunately most people are bound stationary by that necessity of making money. We are all frozen into a rigid social structure. There's no single app that can change this. It's a generational change needing to happen. What's gonna change it is building those communes, one by one, nurturing the culture of sharing, community living and openness. Then, those communes attract by their success, more get started, they get interconnected helping each other. A new economy gets born. That's what we need to help to happen with our apps. We need to provide organizational tools to make forming such communes easier. It's very hard right now. Many are trying, and everyone is groping in the dark.

評論

• Negative cardinality is deficit of something, a task yet to be done. It has to do with sequence, then, and time. Really interesting.
• Cardinality number can be a measure of mass. Then negative cardinality is negative mass. ???? What does it mean?