Is blockchain still not for TW?

[Mat]

Some years ago I posted the idea about TW on blockchain (i.e the tech upon which e.g Bitcoin is based). It was not met with any enthusiasm but I wonder if the sentiment is still the same.

At least two things have changed:

1. We now all curse at why we didn't by loads of cryptocoins ;-) 
2. The concept of NFT's have become more mainstream.

In brief, a NFT is an entitiy on a blockchain that is unique and non-divisable. 

I can definitely see a case for tiddlers as NFTs. Both entities are uniqe and can have a unique owner. They are public and forkable (i.e 'copyable'). I assume also full TW's could be NFTs.

A tiddler author could have a physical proof of origination and ownership. The NFT could probably be made to contain revision history.

In addition it could make tiddlers tradeable. Why would anybody want that? I don't know, but I can at least understand that some things manifested in tiddly form could have economic value. When we think of tiddlers today, they are freely shared so instead think of the tiddlers that we don't see today. Just like e.g "images" can be freely shared (great!) there is also justification for non-free images. Or burger recipes. Or custom tiddly solutions.

I would not be surprised if TW-on-blockchain is created one sunny day, when the blockchain tech is simplified to a degree that is is easy enough to set these things up and the costs are low enough, including costs from of using the system.

Motovun Jack as a CryptoKitty, anybody?

Just sayin.

<:-)

[Hans Wobbe]

Hi Mat:

Thanks for posting this.  

I had not stopped to think that NFTs are non-divisible (an obvious statement, in hind-sight).  That statement makes me wonder how many of the uses of prime numbers in encryoption and security work ( a long-time pre-coccupation of mine, for Identity applications ) could be metaphorically mapped to these.  It might turn out that this is an interesting way of melding NFTs some of the wp:Steganography concepts.

Thanks for sparking some interesting ideas.

Cheers,

Hans

[Finn Lancaster]

Really interesting idea. While I have not had any experience with Bitcoin or blockchains, I have looked at JS custom blockchain tutorials, and have even began a side-project of a GPU powered miner to embed with an html script tag. Maybe I could make a plug-in for TW with this idea... 

Anyways, I don’t know how much help these’ll be, but hopefully they’re useful to someone: 

(None of these are mine, they are all from the source at  https://github.com/danistefanovic/build-your-own-x#build-your-own-blockchain--cryptocurrency) 

https://github.com/nambrot/blockchain-in-js

https://medium.com/@spenserhuang/learn-build-a-javascript-blockchain-part-1-ca61c285821e

https://github.com/Savjee/SavjeeCoin

https://www.hackdoor.io/articles/writing-a-blockchain-in-nodejs-6512fec33307

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f9c6726a-ce8d-4f38-b91f-857c60ffb731n%40googlegroups.com.

[ludwa6]

The idea of tiddlers as NFTs is interesting, Mat... Even if only to get people thinking in substantive terms about their value.  

But i wonder if these two concepts are not somehow antithetical.  I thought the fundamental idea of TidddlyWiki was to break ideas down into atomic units (i.e. the most granular deconstruction of an idea that still makes sense as standalone information entity), while the idea of a Non-Fungible Token is that it should be something so special and non-replicable as to become a highly valued collectible.  The latter seems to imply rich media -like those very elaborate digital works of art and special moments of video footage that have famously traded for millions. Must admit though: i really don't understand why anyone would pay so much for anything digital! 

All that being said, i must add: the code that i have taken away from this forum -some pretty "tiddly" indeed (in terms of size) and also some pretty complex plugins- is of great and unique value -certainly more than some stupid 10-second video of political propaganda (oh, how i would love to meet the sucker that paid $6.6mil for this! :-)... And if NFTs can somehow serve to correct this imbalance, and get some marketable currency flowing back to TW devs in consideration of the value they produce, then that could be a very good thing.  

Is that in fact the motivation behind your musings about this, Mat?

/walt

[Folke Hermansson Snickars]

As a user of TiddlyWiki and a newcomer of the TW-group I found this interesting discussion of  micro payment development. As an alternative to blockchain,  why not have a look at holochain. As I understand it holochain will provide the features you are looking for.

Folke

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/2e033d10-c7b4-42e9-bcd7-257195f59ec4n%40googlegroups.com.

[Javier Eduardo Rojas Romero]

On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 03:41:58AM -0700, Mat wrote:
> Some years ago I posted

> <https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/sh3Sz1DVOVs/m/RZn-EBv9CgAJ> the

> idea about TW on blockchain (i.e the tech upon which e.g Bitcoin is based).
> It was not met with any enthusiasm but I wonder if the sentiment is still
> the same.

so, what has changed regarding bitcon (not a typo) and the blockchain in
general?

I mean, for the better. Nothing, from what I see. If anything, nowadays
is even more clear to everybody that it is nothing but a really toxic
ponzi scheme.

--
Javier

[Mat]

Indeed as some of you note, I just posted this as food for thought.

BTW, here's some decent list I found with examles of uses of blockchain tech.

Please note that this thread is not a discussion about the validity of Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies. That is a totally different discussion.

<:-)

[Jed Carty]

The first, and really only, question about all of this is, what would be improved by adding a blockchain or NFTs?

And then, if somehow there is something to improve, is the improvement get us more than the cost in complexity and real-word resources required to build and maintain the chain?

This was the part that was never actually address in previous discussions, there were a lot of comments about how we would be improving tiddlywiki in some way, but there were no descriptions of how this would actually happen or what the improvements would be.

Of the examples on the list you linked to which ones are actually improved by the inclusion of a blockchain?

For security things a blockchain just gives a vector for behavioural analysis that is necessarily publicly viewable without any demonstrated benefit over other simpler systems that don't consume the resources needed to create and maintain a secure blockchain. Putting medical records in a block chain means that if someone manages to get access to my records they have permanent access. Why would I want there to be a permanent unalterable record of my health? In order for it to be useful other people have to have access to it and as has been demonstrated many many times even the best intentioned people are not good with security, and it being a permanent addition to the blockchain means that anyone who has access now doesn't just have to have good security practices now, they have to have good security practices forever or it affects me directly.

For all the manufacturing and industrial applications the propertied benefits aren't really there. A permanent unalterable record of supply chain movement is only useful if no one ever makes mistakes, because it is unalterable so you can't fix a mistake, and no one lies. I could say there are 10000 items in a shipment when there are actually only 9500 and as long as it got one step away from me I have 'proof' that I delivered what I claimed and whoever the person in the chain before the one who discovers the discrepancy is the one left with the blame.

Aside from git, which existed for decades before the term 'blockchain' became generally known, the only application I have seen that could be reasonably argued to be improved by adding a blockchain or NFTs are collectable toys where the NFT makes creating a false certificate of authenticity more difficult.

But then without some other form of proof there isn't any way to actually know that the person who created the original NFT is acting in good faith, the entire system is based on there not being any bad actors in the entire system. The 'trustless' part comes after a step that requires blind trust.

[Mat]

@inmysocks

That's a very sober approach - but/and which I don't think anyone has contradicted. My question is; could blockchain somehow be of value for TW? I would not be surprised if it could, especially for aspects that we currently disregard or dismiss for TW. After all, TW is very generic so one way of looking at the question is if there are non-TW use cases that where blockchain is advantagous or even critical, and only then ask if TW could be incorporated and bring value in that context.

Interestingly, you question the value of blockchain tech per se and identify a single use case (NFT's for collectable toys). I didn't intend for this thread to go there but I guess it's run its course so:

I can see many use cases where blockchains make sense: One general area is "traceability". For example a car blockchain that tracks ownership of cars, their mileage, repairs etc. Or a housing registry. Makes a lot of sense to me. I can also see how central banks / nations would want full control over their money flows. Here's a use general case for "logistics" and explanation for why blockchain tech supposedly is perfect for it. If nothing else, the article should make it clear (at least to me) that it can be difficult to see the use of blockchain if one doesn't actually know of the needs for the particular business. Other than traceability, blockchains also bring the smart contract aspect that cuts out middle men for transactions. A pretty big deal and potentially an enormous money saver. And, if nothing else, at least the potential for decentralized control of things should resonate with TW folks.

Disclaimer: I know very little about blockchain tech but it is becoming a mature technology and there's billions USD poured into it... so there has to be something to it, I figure...

<:-)

[Soren Bjornstad]

One blockchain-related thing I do with my TiddlyWiki is stamp the Git repo containing the wiki with OpenTimestamps. It piggybacks on PGP signing, adding a timestamp on top of the signature. Whenever a commit is made, it calculates hashes for all the blobs in the commit and (through a Merkle tree calculated by an OpenTimestamps server, to reduce the number of blockchain transactions required to a manageable level) submits proof of that hash to the Bitcoin blockchain within a couple of hours. (Bitcoin only right now, but the protocol is flexible enough to support other options.)

This can prove that a particular version of the wiki existed as of a specific time in the Git logs. So if I ever had a plagiarism or copyright dispute, or ended up in court in a situation where some of my notes were relevant, I would be able to prove that I had the notes no later than a specific date.

$ git log --show-signature

commit d9aead06217e377ef3e45da3a430566aec2f2d5b
ots: Got 3 attestation(s) from cache
ots: Success! Bitcoin block 679274 attests existence as of 2021-04-14 CDT
ots: Good timestamp
gpg: Signature made Wed 14 Apr 2021 10:01:08 PM CDT
gpg:                using RSA key 0AFBDCFD915DD0AE5B0FF14D3DE2F7C1129828AC
gpg: Good signature from "Soren I. Bjornstad (Zettelkasten Signing) <zettel...@sorenbjornstad.com>"
[ultimate]

There's also a ots git-extract command that can extract the signature for just a particular file (tiddler) at a particular commit – that way you don't have to share your whole Git repository with someone who wants to verify.

I've never had to use this, but it's free, not hard to set up, and could come in handy someday. It is definitely something that cannot be done without either blockchain or a central authority that all parties trust, including parties you may not know about yet.

[TW Tones]

Mart,

I applaud your raising blockchain as a possible integration to tiddlywiki. 

I spent some time researching the technology, but I could not build an instance, nor am I an expert, however some thoughts;

I think it could be a good technology to make use of with tiddlywiki, especially since it does promote secure sharing, unalterable "documents" and cutting out the middlemen (which is some ways a feature of tiddlywiki), 

Perhaps the first application I can see is if there were a way to publish selected tiddlers into a blockchain, effectively small documents. A range of features not possible in standard tiddlywiki would then become available to tiddlywiki users and designers. In this case we would look at a providing secure, certified shared information services via such a blockchain and to users of tiddlywiki. Plugins and utility data could be published to the blockchain for public access and private tiddlers for security `between wikis and wiki users.

Now this somewhat simplified description of a block chain of secure tiddlers could actually generate a wide number of seriously powerful solutions, by keeping it to a simple set of enabling blockchain technologies linked to the tiddler. I have cultivated a creative side to my use of Information Technology and can imagine many possibilities, but I will not extrapolate for know asI hope others may contribute ideas unaffected by what I think.

As a person concerned with environmental damage I would be keen not to develop a mining process that costs so much computing power as just bitcoin is already using a substantial percentage of total world computing and power resources. I am not sure what this means for our possible uses.

Regards

Tones

[Jed Carty]

Yes, the central question is could blockchain be useful to tiddlywiki. And so far the only answer has been to use it as a proof of existence by storing what is in one blockchain (file hashes in git) in a different from in another block chain.

Also, traceability in a blockchain is guaranteed only for events that happen on the blockchain, not for what the blockchain is supposed to represent. It is always open to any sort of manipulation at the human interface side. I could start a car tracing block chain, and I could add 10000 cars to it saying that I own them. That has no bearing on the real world without some mediating central authority, and with a mediating central authority the blockchain is redundant.

People keep saying 'I am not familiar with the technology' and then arguing against someone who has studied the theory and technology that goes into blockchains in academic, hobby and professional capacities. The blind faith in the unchangeable nature of a blockchain is a huge security risk to anything that uses it. It is worth repeating over and over: all the guarantees are just for the numbers stored on the computer, there are absolutely no guarantees about what those numbers represent. All the traceability claims completely fail when it gets to the data entry into the blockchain.

After working with some startups I am very familiar with how easy it is to separate people from large sums of money by making magical claims that aren't backed up by reality, investment in a technology and the actual utility of the technology don't correlate. 

And as far as smart contracts go, never sign a contract you don't understand. Someone with my skills would be able to make a contract that does whatever I want it to do and have it all be essentially invisible to someone who isn't intimately familiar with the technology that goes though the code line by line to verify every part of it.

As as example: https://kf106.medium.com/how-to-sleepmint-nft-tokens-bc347dc148f2

For ip protection, if Sony (or any other large monied entity) wanted to claim ownership of anything I have created I would bet on their money and lawyers over any proof I have of ownership every time, regardless of what proof of ownership I have, no matter how impossible it is to counterfeit.

But, all of that is off topic, to address the original topic, there are three questions that need to be answered: what, how and why.

Why is easy, because it could be interesting. So we don't have to worry about that.

What is the important one that hasn't been answered aside from a legally untested method for proof of ip ownership. And that isn't a method for tiddlywiki so much as just an option using external tools. And given what I know, I would never accept a hash stored on a blockchain as the only proof of a claim if there were any significant consequences related to it.

It is impossible to answer how without answering what first.

So, what would any blockchain technology do in tiddlywiki? Without that we may as well say 'should we incorporate Ingenuity flying on mars into tiddlywiki?' No one is going to claim that Ingenuity isn't important or worth paying attention to, but what does the question even mean? It is just gibberish without some idea of what 'incorporate' would involve.

This is the exact same question as before and it needs an answer before there is any chance of discussion other than playing buzzword bingo. Like what does 'a blockchain of secure tiddlers' mean in practical terms?

[Jed Carty]

or perhaps I am being too hard on the idea. Instead if you all want I can add blockchain to tiddlywiki and sell NFTs pointing to wikis that I made, like the original twederation wiki or the interaction fiction wiki.

[Hans Wobbe]

I remain interested in Distributed Ledger Technology much more than I am interested in BitCoin and its other financial derivatives, that even Central Banks are considering as Cash replacements.  ( And I am not at all interested in NFTs since the Name says it all ... "Non Fungible" ... )

One thing I really appreciate about this communitiy is the technological creativity that emerges here.  In part, I think it results from the fact that community membership is quite diverse, bring a lot of different experience and insight to bear.

As more and more DLT systems emerge, it becomes appealing to me to be able to use partial segments from multiple systems as an effective combination lock.  For example, a combination of:

• The first 4 digits of the latitue and longiture of (as reported by my cell phone) 
• The last 4 digits of an active Credit Card (verifiable against Credit Bureau data, together with full Address)
• A reference to a recognized Social Media site (preferably with a Pictire and peer reviewed) e.g. linkedIn or Flickr
• The last 4 digits of my Passport number
• ...

Depending need, I can select various combinations that even include a startTime and validity Duraction.

 

With a bit of proper encoding into a Unicode hash, it becomes possible to even make such a key remarkably short since there are about 2.2 million useful Unicode points have been defined, ensuring that (2e6)e4 gives more than enough room!

The appeal is that I can create distinct Tokens that meet my Security and Privacy needs, but that others can verify from reliable sources of public Definitive Data.

Comments will be appreciated.

Cheers,

Hans

[Jed Carty]

A distributed ledger and a blockchain are distinct technologies. You can use a blockchain to build a verifiable distributed ledger (verifiable in the sense of being able to detect tampering after data has been entered, there aren't any checks on the validity of the source data), but it is far from the only way to do so. Distributed hash tables have been very successful as distributed data stores that are far more scalable than bitcoin in the long term, in a large part because it doesn't have the continuously growing record of all previous actions, and it doesn't have the huge security and privacy issues that a blockchain has.

So distributed ledgers are very interesting, but while blockchains can be used as distributed ledgers they are not the same thing.

[Hans Wobbe]

Thanks for the reply.  It will ceratinly help me to think of these as distinct technologies, at  least until I get a bit more "han(d)s-on" experience :-)

[Jon]

Just in case this is of interest - seems to be quite cutting edge https://qortal.org/

[TW Tones]

If I may remind all, block chain is simply an algorithm, it can be used in many ways including in ways counter to its well known applications, such as cryptocurrencies. A  Distributed Ledger can serve many functions and you can have open transactions that a fully traceable, in fact that is a potential strength,  as usual its all about agreements in the way we operate, the rules and conventions and scope. For example I could maintain my own blockchain for my own ledger to achieve one thing, or I could share a block chain with partners and trusted collaborators just for us. Block chains Distributed ledger is part of its appeal for crypto currency, but this has moral and ethical issues as is seen by the use of crypto currencies for money laundering etc...

It is we who chose what to do with any algorithm.

I for one believe the tiddler concept lends itself to placement on a blockchain, And from there thousands of innovative solutions could develop. In some ways this is the same as adding tiddler to a database, but has other results as well.

Tones