Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:43:27 -0400 From: funkymail To: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: [spam][crazy][fiction][random] Non-Canon MCBoss Spinoffs Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/hYt6IIPFb8HLow7bf39FoKjY9MCu854hWpESH2Oiyfs > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/mWO8kdHEkJ-Zh1TJBIya-T5sJBXdzr6NGQzP1CN0Chc > > > > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/a2FrAIlf2EqBT8TQ6y-E_Y69N_KqLPgPhDTGNG-A5ZM > > > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/3wFjC-y780bhFc9oPPYBTUEkTOjBMgS3W7sqUy65pT4#lUm9coOPT9JxOJ2ewK4sGxvIoZjXQeHi70qGUaraq06scjbcxX1kzzt3CPVeK1pI#1896085 > > > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/tIBH7dOj7U5kHpBxkPhSDjLoYiSfL9-Dl1Hhdpw0iSU > > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/kRCOQar2xH-RkocPZ8sOGiaLSWl4ivNa0mLT08rn3fU#EkyX7KwYSxMosGQjB_iN1HmdVLxPwOtck3_w4HwHj8uo12uM5tFiopyR2H9-hS5s#1896489 > > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/HagBr8xWiwbtIgvxnsRV0V7tA9g9Yhnh2Y7ODom-lL8 > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/XgcXcBy7_jsOxNa7FEiBSeyrC2rjUb4YxFlhnrdEOeI#uFrMuJF_1ACbNpwIYSw_3D-DbLH4JGAHDXxm8ImJzPqpUZGlYq279PD7Y3Lv-dlB#1897091 > > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/55zJYMXemTsh-uxgKUxNQIhKrvg9IdQAu37EYDSDMjs > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/PxShJbkAXyDCuO8AcDAtpaVv01s1p1um3mC09I0sABU#4uAwme8uhsv6abGnf1j1lLN2DqdbINdRE-AhSBqoXE9VNfe3hedEdB9EGFPcPKIx#1897094 > > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/4sPnE2J_r2D9l2OtyRispMOaRbCri23XFKugTLuaLic > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/0HvvLyVn6IKAeW64WwWrK3OQxIzmR0E-1OkBMKXaC2U#v2Bp1ZdSwX1Wi5r4CtbqL88A2m2xe6FBV1WqsgbyC_6aMh31j6oTGUhIiP8NRuGN#1897103 > > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/Jw0Y9R8IBaPlePWk0GmGtDvkwMM1TmBm2I0kmDKoOQA > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/4c4ogh0qZbZCVHZTwDulKKnvdfQDZhAYV4SPq9b7_co#hmjYwT8Traahoicb6LCADckamkhmYHNIvC1iNYW0aydwN5oDmpBVakqp6jdK1n9h#1897124 > > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/2LDE7exgAUzIezT12u9toJa2JSUE8yp8hx9xbV_MKPw > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/d9U3Y2YdOIlOPce0TNB4ALg7ZJwHjiB4ol8Njq7IBmM#TWbiekdoZw16XraAJuOfX1YmSGQv3l-F2gcRMpNKp3OJspnocFiDaoadDpB-Hcir#1897313 > > > > > https://aoweave.tech/85Q3SQwSbUtwrITuUzVPbKseAHHIfP7w5l3AB0iFiUI > > > > https://aoweave.tech/_XuGeICiXOelkjoFUJTwWF92EFccKFFUfIAds8HeCuc#yFB_kC7WdYHYkhy6ffEgUr2AXqZbg4WM2_-SEV5j4-igRD-ELN6BIFLdpWmjFCHH#1897318 > > > > https://aoweave.tech/3SimE6KCJCNnligrpBIAMwmt0-mcGGDJ8OzRly3uVeQ > > > https://aoweave.tech/k6OqacHE35A6hyGJ_S00tuGBDbEzGeinMtP4HogXP6A#0h6DJ6UaKiQ0o16ae2s653Yymdx7AYBlvSE6Da3vBlOzXpOJ9hTzgn-DTvKlzq1z#1897840 > > > https://aoweave.tech/IN_hP7kSJJZZQWS1GvqjOAKHSlMBZV0XCPfMmYHrEWc > > > > bip b > > > > https://aoweave.tech/gpYK1JphfChcLQKLM2QOZ8nguKOhxFstgZWBQssIBzc#fjV47fJz9qwABvdzfDXoYyF1r5yQGyPjcszaC0CWzdvxOfZzoZQJ0MKxCMNlg64R#1898566 > > https://aoweave.tech/dXu8N0TGFBTmEBh6NXdD5tivWsBijWGFl-UgvUnzoVU > > i found some fun/simple coding tasks that might relax me today we'll see > > i tried to download one of my streans (by patching out urls and such) and it turns out pyarweave might need its block format updated! > > in other news i think i solved trustwebs (more likely i will be > adding mistakes to an existing solution to only part of the problem) which is so on-topic and cool!!! > > the idea (hun i may have said this before but it might be more stable):: > - all onformation is useful. the system doesn't decide what is > trustworthy. > - user express statements, votes, whatever signed by public keys. > a user can have one or many public keys, freely change them etc. > trust is associated with a public key. > - a user can privately express things they consider of value. this > information is not shared but is used by their client to identify > public keys that share their view. this transfer of trust is then used > key-to-key. > - trust of a key hinges on a _termination time_, the earliest opinion > that _disagrees_ with the source of transfer. at this point the key > that changed its similarity has entered a different mood or it or its > owner has been otherwise coopted by other opinions. > - the design hinges on universal access to a trusted store. if this is > not available then it's more like an advanced friend-to-friend > situation. > upgrades: > - custom functions for trust transfer including partial trust such as > 0.0-1.0 > - market or work based incentivization > attacks: > - an adversary might create many thousands or millions of public keys > that express unrelated choices and opinions in order to try to make > the algorithm useless. to handle if this happens, the search for > good keys would need to become more robust, verifying many agreeing > opinions, or using other avenues such as friebd-to-friend. > > The basic heartening ideas are of not requiring system trust or relativ > infotnation value, and using the patterns of what is real and logically shown > to identify what the user finds useful. > > For example, in that sybil-key-attack, any information that can be > publicly shared and used to differentiate the attackers from good users, > can then be used by everybody to filter them out, using simple > propagation of trusted properties. > > But the nice thing is once you find a good user, easy if you know a > user personally, then you get all their trusted keys, and the more > shared knowledgr you form with them the more readily you can filter > the attackers out, possibly at that point the attackers a setting a > baseline of trusted agreement that needs to be formed to filter out > noise. Ideally things evolve such that performing an attack strengthens > the network, but it may need further logic. > > The idea is to start simple, try to make it flexible, and leave it open > to adding on. > > so, what would a somple structure be? > need a way of _representing a signed exptrssiont that's useful_ > well, in a cryptographic store expressions are already sigbed. > - need a way of finding other expressions by that key > > then a question, do peoppe express trust of keys? or maybe it's > interesting to keep trust implicit in similar exptession. > i _would_ trust a key if this key were to make thr same decisions and > observations as me. > however, that's only useful if enough decisions and observations are > shared. > > so, maybe it is useful for people to be able to share everything they > express or use. this helps the network function. but information could > also be kept local if privacy is desired. > > most important information to share is the expressions .. big work then > is transfer of trust > > now, an interesting thing is that users and third party data sources > could work together. say you jave some data from a provider or respurce > or scan of a document. this source could be given a public key too, and > a date ..... > > basically _trust is extremely useful in the face of incorrect or > cobflixting information_ and it can be done with improved concern for > privacy which is the big problen with information trust netwotks, > exposing users with conflicting views. > > maybe had more mature expressions around this in the past :/ like i > think i came up with much better ways of protecting users keeping them > in carefully expanding groups that only learned a little about each > other and such :/ > > but y'gotta start somewhere. > > nowadays when attacks come they can be powerful aggressivr strikes that > serve to not simply briefly disrupt a neteork but as part of coordinate > disruption of teams, communities, people. this makes the "try it and > improvr" strategy less effective or useful. > > still, one has to start somewhere. > > vulnerabilities serve as honeypots only if the people involved stay > safe and able to access and use logs that were successfully made and > retained. > > so! > > information is not complex. basically you have a subject, a property and > a value. > > so say i drive by a gas station and the price is $5.20 ir $2.18 up on > bright letters, i could publicize this informatioj further. but then say > i go to yhe pump and it says $4.09 I can publicize this too. > > For that to be useful, we need to specify where the measurement was > takeb from, as well as infer trust algorithms from measurement > disparity. > The real price of gas eas $4 but the sign said $2 or $5. This means: > - signs only usually relate real price > - they didn't at this gas station . > > Just like a user can get coopted by othet opinions, so did the sign at > the gas station. We wouldn't want to trust it again without some process > if rebuilding trust. > > https://aoweave.tech/Cx65hQ9RGTS5YoILo4SwTf_o4YqQZVtokduck2dw9VI#43AkodsNmVKUracXmA-w-vEJoS9MwLDxtw5NmBx3Bc_b7JRKkTSyvoivKcIIENIn#1899604 > https://aoweave.tech/QyhLa5Wvzn2pL2qryCUnqR4noJbomUpMa53mL0GixM4 We can take that further. Say the price of gas is _fluctuating wildly at the pump_ at that gas station. First it's $4.24, then later it's $3.89, then latet it's $4.69 . Users don't necessarily expect this but it's physically possible. You could model this, use a standard devistion or a running average or train a model to predict it somehow, but also you could consider trust over time. Measurements are not usually made simultaneousl--