You are reading content from Scuttlebutt
Feed of @Cy

I'm a guy in the Pacific Northwest, teller of tales, reluctant philosopher, and total coder spazz. Ask me about my stories, public keys, ponies, or if you want to go take a walk around town. I don't have any walking partners, or friends at all really, so I could really use your company! Meet you at the transit center? I know, it's a long shot...

Re: %L2qxQRV1e

Oh and the best idea I've heard for "privacy gradation" is to have separate feeds with different levels of privacy. Posting to less private can cascade to more private, but not vice versa. #secushare is only theoretical so far though, so I don't know of any communication tool that does that.

Re: %L2qxQRV1e

@Lenny Abramov

Then there's the fact that the rando asshat was over the top m'lady polite.

[gigantic explanation that branching totally makes people want to roleplay their generic mmo character, in 3 parts since twitter's "Don't post more than 151 words" doesn't apply to them]

thanks for trying to tell me what we do internally, my dude 9_9

You getting mad at my obvious attempt at creating dialogue and discussion with you, instead of just replying that I am wrong or otherwise correct me in my false assumptions, is really just disheartening for me. You do you though. I'm sorry if it offended. I'll leave you to it.

I think that's just a teeny bit passive aggressive, talking all about what the other person did wrong in very polite terms. This is exactly how trolls f*ck people up, by always being polite and making people think they have only good intentions, while provoking the other person to become angry, irrational and offensive. Not that this person's necessarily trolling on purpose, but even if they're just that damn egotistical, it has the same effect.

It was kind of insensitive too, that she posts a message about how she's not sure something is possible, and gets a kindly 3 part explanation that it's totally possible and she's just too incompetent to know how. I'd have tried to empathize with her before responding, like saying "Must be frustrating when something that seems so simple is so difficult to accomplish." Or at least I'd admit my own inexperience and ignorance. "Never worked on MMO myself, curious why branching dialog doesn't get players to roleplay?" Then I might stand a chance of getting a straight answer like, "Players treat branching dialog like their own decisions, not the character's."

As for firing her, that is total bullshit, and I agree. It's a great example of why privacy is so important, since without it we all have to be plastic, professional and polite all the time, slave to our employers even when not working, with no personal lives of our own. And anyone who dares be an actual human being gets her whole career ruined, just because people might decide the company were responsible for her calling her someone a rando asshat, and the company therefore have to attack her to defend their good image.

It also shows how marketing is evil, and companies shouldn't be allowed to pretend like they're paragons of virtue to trick people into trusting them and buying their shitty game. All companies are groups of people, and people sometimes call someone a rando asshat. Covering that up is just how the real monsters in society convince you to let your guard down. This gaming company felt pressured to fire her because of the unethical marketing of other companies trying to trick us into thinking they can do no wrong.

Re: %yrCuVKdHQ


Welcome! Distributed computing's a pretty neat idea, especially how it can potentially be used to establish trust.

Re: %4IyfRzX1s


It's really pretty! One problem is that scuttlebutt does not ever at all by no means ever allow forks. With your second graphic, I've seen assurance from the developers that everything will horribly break the moment you have two different tails to your block chain.

The block chain is built from the branches to the root I'm pretty sure, since old messages can't psychically divine what the hash for the next message is gonna be. So the newest message tells you the message before it, and that tells you the one before that, and if any message in the chain is ever lost... all messages previous to it are also lost, I'm pretty sure.

Your "appear different to different peers" doesn't seem to be animating the green lens. In any case, I don't think that's a big selling point for the network, just a cosmetic perk for some clients by which you can assign someone a different picture if you want. Doesn't offer anyone a way to have different peers see different things like how #secushare is trying to do it.

What are you trying to say about public and private keys? The circle thing looks neat!

Not sure what that final graphic is about.

Re: %81xPlgt7A


I use Tox for decentralized instant messaging. Though nobody ever talks to me on it, since I don't really have any friends. But I tested with their "echo bot" and it was working fine.

Someone was using scuttlebutt to do online chat the other day. Tons of "so-and-so posted chat such-and-such" started showing up on my feed.

I'm not a huge fan of instant messaging, because the "instant" part makes it possible to take away your anonymity. It's called a "timing attack" and all they have to do is watch when you come online in the chat, and compare that with all the data your ISP sells about its customers, to see which customer also came online at that time. I think high latency communication like scuttlebutt is better, since it can at least in theory have a random delay to confuse anyone trying to figure out who to blacklist, sabotage or threaten.

I don't think Tox works offline, but I dunno. Do you really think it's safe to store your undelivered message on intermediate relays for long periods of time? That gives authorities more time to go after your relays one-by-one, to track who's talking to whom, and when they're doing it.



Well hey if you're laughing then you must've escaped a terrible job, right? What kind of job was it, and what made you leave?

Re: %lx8gWDDd1


I wonder if people's idea of Holiday is supposed to be different based on the person, or if there's something wrong with me that my idea of an ideal holiday nowadays is:

I feel really unenthusiastic about vacations, I think because at the end of the vacation you have to come back. Some places are definitely better to visit than to live in, and I fully understand that. I just can't imagine finding any consolation in being able to escape for a few days, if my day-to-day life was so grueling that I needed a vacation. I'd rather not have to work as hard, than get some temporary vacation from it.

Maybe my dad ruined vacations for me, with how angry he got if we weren't properly enjoying ourselves. Or maybe it's that I'm poor, so can't afford to go anywhere. I'm certainly not going to circumnavigate the globe on foot! Maybe it's my lack of respect for any organized religion and their "holy days." But for me, holidays are a great time to exploit everyone else's peculiar fixation with holidays, and get paid twice as much as usual for working on those days. Which would be a lot more useful if I was actually working... but that's how I feel about such things.

Re: %y3B5+iN+O


Why the heck do people keep feeding that thing dog pictures...

luna deep dream.jpg

Re: %vzh+grixd

@Kim Simmons

what a grease spoon!

that mold growing on the walls really gives it that extra revolting touch.

Re: %GI00QBp4r


There's an inherent latency built in to any decision like this that has the almost certain potential that any change in behaviour needs to be observed over a significant measurable time to build up trust to the point where you'd consider splitting things more evenly distributed.

Why significant? More observations just means predictions'll be more accurate, but a few observations is better than just random chance. You want to unevenly distribute things ASAP, because you want your friends to have good things, and you want people motivated to help you in return.

I lived 2 blocks away from a guy who killed a friend of mine when I was 7 years old. He was generally trustworthy until he suddenly wasn't.

I think you'll find that 99.9999999% of the time, people aren't suddenly afflicted with severe psychosis out of the blue, which causes them to then murder people, instead of whimper and rock harmlessly in the corner. I'm sorry you had a bad experience, but unless you have significant statistics for neighbors going on murder sprees, I'm going to have to file that under unavoidable, isolated tragedy.

I think what I'm not making clear is that I'm trying to get us to find out who among us is a murderous jerk, and currently we hardly do so at all. We live in isolation from each other in our own communities. There are always signs when guys like that are going wrong, and we don't see those signs because we're too busy hiding, letting the problems fester, and locking ourselves away from any potential allies.

A reputation economy would actively fight against that, since there would be motivation for you to overcome your paranoia and find people in your community who you can test for reliability, by getting them to also participate in this theoretical economy. The money economy actively encourages it though, since isolated workers have less negotiation power, so can be forced to work more for less pay.

while past behaviour can commonly be used as a potential indicator of future behaviour, the two are not causal, and they are perceptually correlated by virtue of the idea that a person is who they are and will never change, which is a ridiculous notion.

It's not ridiculous. If you bet on people dramatically changing overnight, you're gonna go bankrupt before you find someone who does. People are gonna do bad things unexpectedly in any system, so the only standards you can hold a system to is whether it enables people to do bad things and get away with it, and how many people they can screw over when doing so.

Show whole feed
Join Scuttlebutt now