[Hardware] "success"

[Jim C. Nasby]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 05:21:08PM -0600, John L. Bass wrote:
> 
> Jim,
> 
> There is SELDOM a good technical solution for a social problem, unless
> there are clear limits on the social side which control negative behaviors
> with some very strong adversity on failure. Not even life in jail is a
> deterant, or even death, for some individuals, when there is a good
> posibility of fame or riches for cheating the system.
> 
> Decision theory and Game Theory are well worth spending some time thinking
> about BEFORE attempting to design a technical solution to a social problem.
> 
> I was quite serious in responding to your opening the door, assuming
> suggesting practical ideas to solve the problem would be openly considered.
 
The problem is we need much more than just ideas. We need both plans and
then enough interested parties to actually get them implimented.

> The best way to solve this problem is drastically change the rules of the
> game to remove self interest in defeating the technology. And to have firm
> limits (IE blacklisting) to remove violators from the game for good, when
> a player's primary goal is disruption of the game, as a DoS attack on the
> other players.
 
Well, one of those rules that would have to change is stats, since
that's a prime motivator for people to cheat. I don't see that working,
though.

As for blacklisting, I can't see anyway to permanently blacklist
someone. Even if we went to forced user registration, they can always
register again with a different email address, etc.

> The current system doesn't protect the goals of the game you setup. First
> it blocks participation of the most likely technology to solve the current
> RSA challenge. Second, the solution is flawed, as a few hours in a debugger
> will disassemble, and/or reverse compile your technical solution, making it
> "open source" for a skilled hacker determined to mess with the game.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 	On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 02:56:12PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> 	> > Which is why this list is dead. The proprietary interests block open
> 	> > access.
> 	> 
> 	> Ideas for ways to do away with the crypto most welcome. :)
> 
> 	Damn, accidentally deleted your email.
> 
> there is always the archive.
> 
> 	In any case, I should have been more explicit: what we need are actual
> 	plans that remove the need for any proprietary code, and then people who
> 	will put the effort in to make them happen. Some of what you mentioned
> 	has been talked about (namely a means to positively identify what user
> 	is submitting a particular work unit), but that's still just the tip of
> 	the iceberg.
> 	-- 
> 	Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect            decibel at distributed.net
> 

-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect            decibel at distributed.net
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"