Ahhh, so that's why RT.com and other sites were 'down'

Comments

• masterofballs@wolfballs.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  Good video. I've read about the proposed block chain certificate authority. Still seems to have similar problems. If Russia and america had nodes, America could just cut off Russian nodes.

  If it works like bitcoin where 50% can make a decision you could just spin up nodes until you have a consensus. Big governments like America and China would be able to win every time.

  Its just the nature of how the internet was created. Just a bunch of servers forwarding each others packets in the hopes that other servers will forward their packets as well. It was built assuming trust.

  source

  • iamtanmay@wolfballs.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    Seeing as to how this is similar to TOR, and what happened there, I think you could be right. However Proof of Work makes it more expensive than owning some TOR nodes. Who does most of the Proof of Work (POW) ? I don't know the model, but if all clients trying to access have to do compute, NSA will need more compute than them.

    Assuming 0.1% of the ~3 Billion PCs and ~6.7 Billion Phones initially use the protocol, you have to compete with 3 million PCs and 6.7 million phones. A Supercomputer for this would need, let's say 50,000 GPU servers - 2x the size of current biggest supercomputer, IBM's Summit - 700 million $.

    Doable, but it took 4 years to build Summit. Every additional 0.1% users, needs same capacity. If other govts fight, expense goes up. In 4 years, global compute and number of users would increase. 16x increase with Moore's law holds, maybe another 0.1% users - 2x. Govt inefficiency adds another 50%. Likely they would have to make an order of 700 * 2 * 1.5 * 16 = 33 Billion $ at least.

    If the number of users takes off like Bitcoin, its hopelessly expensive to keep up. But if its a niche thing like TOR, then its going to be eaten up.

    source