Bitcoin discussion and news

[Storm Fox]

None of those say that in the here and now any refugees are using Blockchain IDs usefully.

Yep, they say they are still trying to work it out at a hackathon, plus it's implied documentation already exists:

This humanitarian project provides an identification system called Blockchain Emergency ID (BE-ID).

“We're working to make the BE-ID comply to UN's guidelines for emergency travel documents,” she added. “We're participating in a hackathon in London this weekend, and that's one of the goals of the hackathon.”

The BE-ID is already available here and allows a person to receive an ID recorded on the blockchain for those who can’t get other identification documents. With this ID, people would be able to receive social assistance and financial services.

 

[StakerOne]

Maybe we should all take one of these each? I'll take this one.

Elections are an excellent example of how low-tech, human-run systems can be best. Compare the UK and its paper and pencil with the US and its voting machines. Elections are safeguarded by the thousands of volunteers (including Tories!) who give up their time to act as invigilators. Human participation creates trust. The more technology you introduce, including your beloved blockchains, the more scope there is for fraud and distrust of the system.

Counting machines are useless and open to fraud, I agree, but I dispute your claim re blockchain voting.

At the moment, officials can't even stop people from double voting on the general election franchise.

The police ALWAYS yield to election officials and there have been horror stories of piles of ballot papers moved in plain sight from one candidate to another, with the Returning Officer refusing inspection.

If the Returning Officer decides to throw an election, (s)he didn't throw the election, it didn't happen and the police refuse point blank the investigate, the Returning Officers decision is final.

 

[Storm Fox]

Counting machines are useless and open to fraud, I agree, but I dispute your claim re blockchain voting.

At the moment, officials can't even stop people from double voting on the general election franchise.

The police ALWAYS yield to election officials and there have been horror stories of piles of ballot papers moved in plain sight from one candidate to another, with the Returning Officer refusing inspection.

If the Returning Officer decides to throw an election, (s)he didn't throw the election, it didn't happen and the police refuse point blank the investigate, the Returning Officers decision is final.

But how does it stop intimidation?

 

[mojo pixy]

...and what does "the returning officer throwing the election" mean?

 

[Storm Fox]

But how does it stop intimidation?

Counting machines are useless and open to fraud, I agree, but I dispute your claim re blockchain voting.

At the moment, officials can't even stop people from double voting on the general election franchise.

The police ALWAYS yield to election officials and there have been horror stories of piles of ballot papers moved in plain sight from one candidate to another, with the Returning Officer refusing inspection.

If the Returning Officer decides to throw an election, (s)he didn't throw the election, it didn't happen and the police refuse point blank the investigate, the Returning Officers decision is final.

Election ink - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[elbows]

Before or after the Marketing Division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation?

I'm not sure but its a shame we never got to hear Douglas Adams take on crypto. I expect the Ark Fleet Ship B would have enthusiastically adopted it as their currency though. May have advantages over leaves.

 

[NoXion]

https://www.unhcr.org/blogs/wp-content/uploads/sites/48/2018/04/fs.pdf
Bitnation Refugee Emergency Response - The Index Project
Bitnation Registers First Refugees on the Blockchain

It's all vapourware without government recognition. The UN talks about "promise", and we all know promises are never broken, right?

 

[NoXion]

Maybe we should all take one of these each? I'll take this one.

Elections are an excellent example of how low-tech, human-run systems can be best. Compare the UK and its paper and pencil with the US and its voting machines. Elections are safeguarded by the thousands of volunteers (including Tories!) who give up their time to act as invigilators. Human participation creates trust. The more technology you introduce, including your beloved blockchains, the more scope there is for fraud and distrust of the system.

Indeed, Tom Scott has done a couple of videos on the subject of electronic voting which are extremely relevant:

 

[Storm Fox]

I'm not sure but its a shame we never got to hear Douglas Adams take on crypto. I expect the Ark Fleet Ship B would have enthusiastically adopted it as their currency though.

I'm pretty sure they would. They adopted the leaf as an official currency thus necessitating cutting down all the trees to reduce leaf availability

 

[not-bono-ever]

The similarities between the execution of Catholicism and blockchain are quite remarkable. How many PoS can dance on the head of a pin ?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Counting machines are useless and open to fraud, I agree, but I dispute your claim re blockchain voting.

At the moment, officials can't even stop people from double voting on the general election franchise.

The police ALWAYS yield to election officials and there have been horror stories of piles of ballot papers moved in plain sight from one candidate to another, with the Returning Officer refusing inspection.

If the Returning Officer decides to throw an election, (s)he didn't throw the election, it didn't happen and the police refuse point blank the investigate, the Returning Officers decision is final.

cAn you give a link to this explaining how it happened?

Cos I suspect this is another example to add to the list of something you don't understand properly. The outside observers - volunteers from all the main parties - can ask to scrutinise everything. Nothing is off-limits to them, and a friend of mine who always works the count ( the actual counters are paid) says they're a royal pain in the arse.

 

[elbows]

I'm pretty sure they would. They adopted the leaf as an official currency thus necessitating cutting down all the trees to reduce leaf availability

Yeah Im afraid that I remembered the leaf stuff while you were writing your post and so ended up making reference to it in an edited version of my post before I saw your reply.

 

[NoXion]

"There have been horror stories"

As opposed to reliable reports? We're gonna overturn our entire electoral system on the basis of rumours? FFS.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

"There have been horror stories"

As opposed to reliable reports? We're gonna overturn our entire electoral system on the basis of rumours? FFS.

We're one press conference outside a garden centre away from total collapse.

 

[StakerOne]

But how does it stop intimidation?

A lot of intimidation is domistic, in the househould. : "oh you're postal vote is here love...and if you want to live under this roof, you're not voting for that party....so let's make sure you vote for the right one....I'll walk you down to the post box..."

 

[StakerOne]

"There have been horror stories"

As opposed to reliable reports? We're gonna overturn our entire electoral system on the basis of rumours? FFS.

FACT: The Returning Officer is NOT legally obliged to allow you to inspect anything.#

Everything is done above board. Most of the time. It's only when "that cunt" actually has a chance of winning, does the bizarre and out of ordinary start to happen.

You can't defraud an election when the votes are counted on a blockchain. When political parties realise how secure it is, they will support it.

 

[stdP]

A lot of intimidation is domistic, in the househould. : "oh you're postal vote is here love...and if you want to live under this roof, you're not voting for that party....so let's make sure you vote for the right one....I'll walk you down to the post box..."

So blockchain can solve domestic abuse as well now? Is there no end to its utility?!

 

[Storm Fox]

A lot of intimidation is domistic, in the househould. : "oh you're postal vote is here love...and if you want to live under this roof, you're not voting for that party....so let's make sure you vote for the right one....I'll walk you down to the post box..."

How is blockchain any different? 'Oh, it's time to vote. Right sit at the computer and let me see you vote' There is a human involved, unless you are going to a polling booth, people can be intimidated in the way you suggest be it Postal vote, voting via computer or vote sent by carrier pigeon, people can be forced to vote.

Luckily it's very rare.

 

[Smangus]

Great. So we have near perfection. With near perfection, it wouldn't be considered as low hanging fruit for blockchain adoption but that doesn't negate any of my previous points that blockchain technology offers far greater privacy and security than conventional systems as well as a whole load of applications.

Blockchains:

• Helps refugees with no documentation prove where they are from and which countries they have travelled through, no one has disputed that.
• Allows ANYONE even a 6 year old, to make money from next to nothing so long as they have a mobile phone and laptop. I find it quite a revelation that school children can be financially free before they even leave school, by learning how to trade and invest. No one has disuputed that, because it's a fact.
• Makes markets much more transparent and efficient, stopping any fraud from happening because everything is out in the open. No one can disuptute that, because it's a fact.
• Zero knowledge proofs will allow people to prove something is true or false, without having to disclose any information. No one can dispute that, because it's a fact.
• Companies will be able to do business with each other in a highly secure manner, in ways they couldn't previously, using trustless systems such as the Baseline protocol, A Microsoft invention, secured by Ethereum. No one can dispute that, because it's a fact.
• Companies that have all of their transactions (Internal and external) on blockchains can be audited in seconds, saving time, money while cutting fraud, with transparency that is trusted by investors. No can disuptute that, because it's a fact.
• Blockchain is and will be used much more in elections to cut out election miscounts, fraud, intimidation as well as making counts almost instantanious. No one can dispute that, because it's a fact.
• Blockchain can be used to store personal qualifications in a secure and private manner, cutting out fraud in the jobs market. No one can dispute that because it's a fact.
• Blockchain will be used to make the housing market much more efficient. If government data is also on the blockchain, including deeds, restrictions, pending planning permission, then the whole process of buying and selling will become a lot more efficient. No one can dispute that because it's a fact.
• Property rights are much better protected on the blockchain, making it easier for people to put up their property as collateral, with a much better and fairer loans system, that won't discriminate against people. No one can dispute that because it's a fact.
• Local communities have much better tools to organise in their areas, setting up DAOs to govern their groups, without fear of having bank accounts shut down if they don't align to certain narratives, or having their funds stolen. Those groups will find it much easier to run their own wealth funds to help out those in need within their own communities. No one can dispute that because it's a fact.
• People can (and do) work for protocols rather employers, because protocols don't discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexuality, gender, religion or political beliefs. No one can dispute that because it's a fact.
• Allows people with no ID, to particpate in the economy. No one can dispute that, because it's a fact.
• Allows people to run websites without fear of censorship, raising money without fear of a financial institution cancelling them. Censorship resistant money and freedom of speech are almost the same thing. No one disputes that, because it's a fact.

I could go on.....

Yeah but can block chain cure my piles though?

Thought not .

Fucking useless pile o shite

 

[StakerOne]

Indeed, Tom Scott has done a couple of videos on the subject of electronic voting which are extremely relevant:

That's electronic voting - Blockchain voting is a different animal.

As for the electorate understanding it properly, they don't need to .... once all the political parties understand it, once the candidates understand it, it doesn't matter - all of those explain to their supporters that it's the best way. And it is. It solves a whole bunch of problems.

For example, voting results can be revealed all at once, to the public at a set time ... yep it's actually possible for all the counting states to be encrypted an unknown to anyone until a set time. Yes, that's weird and bizarre, but it's possible - and when the political parties learn how that works .. they'll be happy with that.

 

[NoXion]

FACT: The Returning Officer is NOT legally obliged to allow you to inspect anything.

Maybe not (although I'd want a citation for that before claiming certainty), but the election observers can certainly kick up a stink if they're denied access. And why wouldn't they? Their whole purposes is to witness everything and make sure it's above board.

Everything is done above board. Most of the time. It's only when "that cunt" actually has a chance of winning, does the bizarre and out of ordinary start to happen.

What the fuck are you talking about?

You can't defraud an election when the votes are counted on a blockchain. When political parties realise how secure it is, they will support it.

You can't have both secret ballots and have a blockchain-based electoral system. They are fundamentally opposed concepts.

 

[StakerOne]

How is blockchain any different? 'Oh, it's time to vote. Right sit at the computer and let me see you vote' There is a human involved, unless you are going to a polling booth, people can be intimidated in the way you suggest be it Postal vote, voting via computer or vote sent by carrier pigeon, people can be forced to vote.

Luckily it's very rare.

Yep that could happen.

And if does .. the "intimidated voter" just votes again later. Easy.

 

[Storm Fox]

Reading through the last few pages, I've gone from wanting to kill blockchain with fire, to wanting to nuke it from orbit just to be sure

 

[StakerOne]

Maybe not (although I'd want a citation for that before claiming certainty), but the election observers can certainly kick up a stink if they're denied access. And why wouldn't they? Their whole purposes is to witness everything and make sure it's above board.



What the fuck are you talking about?



You can't have both secret ballots and have a blockchain-based electoral system. They are fundamentally opposed concepts.

You can have a blockchain voting system that protects people's privacy - in effect a secret ballot.

 

[NoXion]

That's electronic voting - Blockchain voting is a different animal.

Blockchain is done electronically, is it not?

As for the electorate understanding it properly, they don't need to

Yes they do. You can't trust what you don't understand.

 

[NoXion]

You can have a blockchain voting system that protects people's privacy - in effect a secret ballot.

"in effect" means it's not actually secret though, is it?

 

[StakerOne]

Reading through the last few pages, I've gone from wanting to kill blockchain with fire, to wanting to nuke it from orbit just to be sure

Freedom must be distressing if you are an authora-tron.

 

[StakerOne]

Blockchain is done electronically, is it not?



Yes they do. You can't trust what you don't understand.

They trust the candidate they are voting for.

If the candidate they are voting for loves it, that's good enough and believe me, the candidate will love it, because the candidate will invest the time into investigating how it works.

What is there not to love, it helps smaller parties and candidates who don't have loads of resources to run around collection counts with beady eyes.

 

[StakerOne]

"in effect" means it's not actually secret though, is it?

Oh it is. Very, very secret. So secret there is no record anywhere of who voted for who.
There doesn't need to be.

 

[Storm Fox]

Freedom must be distressing if you are an authora-tron.

It's not freedom through. It's an unregulated mess of competing standards and bad actors where only the rich, powerful and unscrupulous will prosper.
For citation see the pages and pages of web3isgoinggreat.