3 ms·

I'd say this problem is best solved not by having no cryptographic identities, but by using disposable identities. If you bound an identity cryptographically t

by urbit 10y ago

I'd say this problem is best solved not by having no cryptographic identities, but by using disposable identities. If you bound an identity cryptographically to your real name, that's permanent -- no getting around it. We all make mistakes. However, one of the benefits of Urbit is that you can build a reputation around a pseudonym that isn't linked to your real-life identity. There's a place for the 4chans of the world, with totally disposable one-time identities. You can do this with Urbit as well -- use a 128-bit self-signing identity (comet). But most people tend to want a little more stability and permanence.

tzs 10y ago
> I'd say this problem is best solved not by having no cryptographic identities, but by using disposable identities. A problem with disposable identities as usually implemented is that they are too cheap and easy to make. This makes it easy to make a new identity every place you want to be an asshole. The end result is that places get tired of this, and ban such identities from their spaces. I think what we might need are semi-disposable identities. You can make a new one whenever you want, but it costs something to make a new one, and that cost goes up with each new semi-disposable identity you make.
- urbit 10y ago
  This is exactly the way Urbit works. (It's sincerely hard to tell from your post whether you've read the documentation, or you just had the same simple idea yourself.) Anyone can create a 128-bit comet. But once the comet system starts being abused by assholes and bots, signs will go up all over Urbit. These signs will say "humans only" and deny admission to comets -- essentially blocking anyone who has not invested any real stake in their identity. The normal quantum of reputation and of human identity is the planet (32 bits, like an IPv4 address). Ideally a virgin planet would cost about $10. Basically, if this cost is far above the amount of money that a spammer can make before a reputation system catches up with the swine, there will be no commercial abuse. This leaves reputation systems to deal with the much easier job of wrangling random creeps and weirdos. So if you invented this design yourself, yes, it's a very good one...
  - Gaelan 10y ago
    There are eight billion people in the world. There are 4 billion possible planets. What is your plan for when urbit takes off and reaches internet-scale? BTW, ~bitret-worwyd here. ;)
    - yarvin9 10y ago
      ~bitret, I remember you from a while back! A planet is like a car -- it's not a toy, it's a tool for a responsible grownup. There are about 4 billion adults in the world. And not all of them are even Internet users. Of course, the population keeps growing. Eventually either people have to learn to share, or the price will go up, or humanity will learn how to stop expanding exponentially. Think of a planet as a unit of autonomy and reputation, not of personality. The global supply of autonomy is 2^32 units. That's not perfect in any sense, but if the supply is infinite the network is ungovernable, and the value of each unit is zero. It's also an improvement on a world in which there's one unit of autonomy, and its name is Mark Zuckerberg. Urbit does a lot for digital freedom, but we're not in the miracle business here. No one can do infinity for digital freedom.
      - kefka 10y ago
        > A planet is like a car -- it's not a toy, it's a tool for a responsible grownup. There are about 4 billion adults in the world. And not all of them are even Internet users. There's a reason why the IETF decided to switch to 2^128 for IP6. Mainly, because there are more computers and devices that need addressing than IP4 can handle. I have to question the design of Urbit why you chose to go with 2^32 addressing space? > Of course, the population keeps growing. Eventually either people have to learn to share, or the price will go up, or humanity will learn how to stop expanding exponentially. Again, the future is "Pay to Play", just like Ethereum? And, is that a population control argument? How would you propose to "stop expanding exponentially"? Chinese method? Ender's Game method, or something else unsavory? > Think of a planet as a unit of autonomy and reputation, not of personality. The global supply of autonomy is 2^32 units. That's not perfect in any sense, but if the supply is infinite the network is ungovernable, and the value of each unit is zero. Ah, so you are the "governor", hence why it must be governed? This is literally artificial scarcity on something that could easily have been near infinite > It's also an improvement on a world in which there's one unit of autonomy, and its name is Mark Zuckerberg. Urbit does a lot for digital freedom, but we're not in the miracle business here. No one can do infinity for digital freedom. So switching from one master to another makes better "freedom"? I get being against walled gardens. I'm against them as well. But you make no point why Urbit isn't just another walled garden (using funny language to hide behind it no less) with you at the helm.
captainmuon 10y ago
That's a good point! One favorite idea of mine is that you have a trusted identity provider, that knows you, and hands out pseudo-anonymous identities. E.g. Facebook vouches User123 is female, 20-25 years old, has been active for 2 years, and is likely not a spammer. This gives you disposable identities and the benefits of proven identity. The problem with any kind of long-lived pseudonymous identity though is that it is really hard to do proper opsec and keep it distinct from your real identity, but I'm not sure there is a technological solution for that. I mean even your grammar can give you away (stylometry).

by urbit 10y ago

tzs 10y ago

> I'd say this problem is best solved not by having no cryptographic identities, but by using disposable identities. A problem with disposable identities as usually implemented is that they are too cheap and easy to make. This makes it easy to make a new identity every place you want to be an asshole. The end result is that places get tired of this, and ban such identities from their spaces. I think what we might need are semi-disposable identities. You can make a new one whenever you want, but it costs something to make a new one, and that cost goes up with each new semi-disposable identity you make.

urbit 10y ago
This is exactly the way Urbit works. (It's sincerely hard to tell from your post whether you've read the documentation, or you just had the same simple idea yourself.) Anyone can create a 128-bit comet. But once the comet system starts being abused by assholes and bots, signs will go up all over Urbit. These signs will say "humans only" and deny admission to comets -- essentially blocking anyone who has not invested any real stake in their identity. The normal quantum of reputation and of human identity is the planet (32 bits, like an IPv4 address). Ideally a virgin planet would cost about $10. Basically, if this cost is far above the amount of money that a spammer can make before a reputation system catches up with the swine, there will be no commercial abuse. This leaves reputation systems to deal with the much easier job of wrangling random creeps and weirdos. So if you invented this design yourself, yes, it's a very good one...
- Gaelan 10y ago
  There are eight billion people in the world. There are 4 billion possible planets. What is your plan for when urbit takes off and reaches internet-scale? BTW, ~bitret-worwyd here. ;)
  - yarvin9 10y ago
    ~bitret, I remember you from a while back! A planet is like a car -- it's not a toy, it's a tool for a responsible grownup. There are about 4 billion adults in the world. And not all of them are even Internet users. Of course, the population keeps growing. Eventually either people have to learn to share, or the price will go up, or humanity will learn how to stop expanding exponentially. Think of a planet as a unit of autonomy and reputation, not of personality. The global supply of autonomy is 2^32 units. That's not perfect in any sense, but if the supply is infinite the network is ungovernable, and the value of each unit is zero. It's also an improvement on a world in which there's one unit of autonomy, and its name is Mark Zuckerberg. Urbit does a lot for digital freedom, but we're not in the miracle business here. No one can do infinity for digital freedom.
    - kefka 10y ago
      > A planet is like a car -- it's not a toy, it's a tool for a responsible grownup. There are about 4 billion adults in the world. And not all of them are even Internet users. There's a reason why the IETF decided to switch to 2^128 for IP6. Mainly, because there are more computers and devices that need addressing than IP4 can handle. I have to question the design of Urbit why you chose to go with 2^32 addressing space? > Of course, the population keeps growing. Eventually either people have to learn to share, or the price will go up, or humanity will learn how to stop expanding exponentially. Again, the future is "Pay to Play", just like Ethereum? And, is that a population control argument? How would you propose to "stop expanding exponentially"? Chinese method? Ender's Game method, or something else unsavory? > Think of a planet as a unit of autonomy and reputation, not of personality. The global supply of autonomy is 2^32 units. That's not perfect in any sense, but if the supply is infinite the network is ungovernable, and the value of each unit is zero. Ah, so you are the "governor", hence why it must be governed? This is literally artificial scarcity on something that could easily have been near infinite > It's also an improvement on a world in which there's one unit of autonomy, and its name is Mark Zuckerberg. Urbit does a lot for digital freedom, but we're not in the miracle business here. No one can do infinity for digital freedom. So switching from one master to another makes better "freedom"? I get being against walled gardens. I'm against them as well. But you make no point why Urbit isn't just another walled garden (using funny language to hide behind it no less) with you at the helm.

captainmuon 10y ago

That's a good point! One favorite idea of mine is that you have a trusted identity provider, that knows you, and hands out pseudo-anonymous identities. E.g. Facebook vouches User123 is female, 20-25 years old, has been active for 2 years, and is likely not a spammer. This gives you disposable identities and the benefits of proven identity. The problem with any kind of long-lived pseudonymous identity though is that it is really hard to do proper opsec and keep it distinct from your real identity, but I'm not sure there is a technological solution for that. I mean even your grammar can give you away (stylometry).