Will Technology Ever Trump Politics?

in verification •  8 years ago  (edited)


Or, will genomic data finally put an end to sock puppets and sybils in trust-networks?

Idea < Money < Politics < Technology

One of the most difficult problems ever faced in open, decentralised networks is to have a design that minimises the effects of sock puppets and sybil attacks, particularly from those with vested interests (usually serving extreme greed at the expense of the greater network). But they've never been solved well enough to ensure any better fidelity of fairness in operation and distribution. Adding zero-knowledge protocols in the mix, genomic data-signed transactions may stand to be the holy grail for trust-networks.

In the case for any "fair" coin distribution, imagine what would it be like to have genomic data in the mix as part of any decentralised network's trust protocol. So the question now is - how do we even begin to ascertain that any genomic data used to sign off transactions come from real or fake signals?

First of all, I think genomic data produces highly novel signatures, and anyone would face difficulty in generating their own "legit" genomic data without access to specialised equipment. If the scenario turns out that it's rather easy to generate fake genomic data afterall, trust networks could could still anchor on genealogical comparisons between any party's genomic data in some private, zero-knowledge way.

Secondly, genomic data could be so valuable that nobody with a sane mind would share them with anyone at all, which is why genetically-augmented trust on the blockchain will require absolute highest levels of privacy and security.

But now you might be thinking - such valuable data could only hurt the common person that will likely not secure their data sufficiently. Think again.. in proof-of-whatever, the problem is not really in any common person's sock puppets and sybils. Their effects are usually mitigated well enough in most blockchain designs, so perhaps such a measure isn't required. But the bigger problem comes from big money interest, as usual. So in that sense, genomic signatures could prove to serve well for trust-networks involving anything whale-like from accounts, activities, and transactions. It may not be too "unfair" to implement weighted genomic-trust protocols for those in place of huge rewards / stakes / power (high risk, high rewards in action).

It could fundamentally be impossible to ascertain real / fake information (can any signatures be proven to be 100% authentic in every sense imaginable?). But something just tells me that it may be possible with genomic data. Of course, genetic mutations or whatever random screw-ups could also unfairly punish innocent identities. Not even sure if I'm making any sense in this post, but it's 6.00 am! Thanks for reading!


Also, I found this earlier - Gene-ChainCoin. Not sure what it is though! Maybe I'll go through it when I have the time. Maybe some of you scientists can have a crack at it!

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I think I am a bit confused as to how genomic data would be obtained and used as proof of anything. Or at least how it would be a superior form of identification. Are we discussing a future hypothetical universe where sequencing is so ubiquitous that everyone has a personal DANA sequencer in their home? Is the sequencing happening in real time to confirm identity? If it's not being obtained in real time (not really a realistic possibility now, and likely not for a significant amount of time into the future) and genomic data is being stored, somewhere, how is it any more reliable then any other identification that can be stolen? How is having "my" (supposed) genomic data proof of me being me unless it is being sequenced directly from me at the exact time of identification being required?

Yup definitely thinking about the ubiquity of any real-time DNA sequencer in the future. Or just about any combination stuff that may work together to proof identity. Even that, I think real-time sequencing could also be faked.. for example how can we prove that signals coming out of a camera is streaming live?

Block chain validation could tell you that the data is coming out in real time. The same could go for data from a camera, if that isn't enough then you require a secondary living human present as well for validation, and if that isn't enough then you are paranoid... I mean.. then you must start questioning if anything is as it seems.

If someone could make thousands of steemit accounts, i'd expect very creative ways to circumvent such validations.. lol but yeah this is far side cryptology..

You are clearly thinking Kevin! I like it.

First of all, I think genomic data produces highly novel signatures, and anyone would face difficulty in generating their own "legit" genomic data without access to specialised equipment.

There is a lot of flexibility here. Genetic variations between individuals is very small, less than a percent. Creating false gene data would be trivial, without specific equipment. There is still incredible uniqueness here that can be useful. Using genomes as keys is interesting; I think I would still go with my pseudorandom keys.

I think the real cool stuff comes when you incorporate secure gene data into systems of decenteralized identity like uPort. Giving users control over the visibility and use of their gene data is going to be important.

There's one problem that I've been trying to find solutions for, but I think it's just way out of my depth. So for example if I'd created farming kits with built-in sensors that measure everything from soil acidity, moisture, crop height sensor, etc for distributed research via blockchain data "rental". How do I even begin to be able to trust that I'm paying for real data? Someone could just fake any signals, unless there's a way to pair signals with hardware and time of transmission. Not even sure what word I'm looking for to describe this problem.

I see what you are saying - verification on the blockchain is hard. If I see this problem as you do, the solution I'd raise would revolve around a few concepts: Trusted parties and reputation systems. You want to have a system in place where reputable users are trusted but any proof of them faking their data would harm their reputation.

Great post @kevinwong
You might find this website mirrors your thoughts http://iamcicada.com
I have a feeling this could take off.
Current powers that be won't give it up easily though.

Very interesting, reading through the WP. Thanks!
(kinda skeptical that the hard problem can be solved..)

In a way the problem is almost already solved. We know what we need.
The issue now is how it's going to be implemented and can it be done before the current powers destroy us all?
Technology should work for us not us for it.
I'm excited after reading the WP. To me its a signal that we're heading in that direction hopefully much sooner than later.

I will just believe that money can beat technology and politics ..

Which is why fintech is booming right now :)

Right...

This post is super freaky. And super deep! It might be on the Horizon...i suppose. But we know there is no 100% security. Only layers and layers and layers 😎

Yup, just to make it harder for those with great power to abuse any network :)

Making a ton of sense @kevinwong Very interesting stuff to think about for sure. It could is all be a double edge blade? We are clearly heading in this direction, we may know sooner than later how it plays out.

On aside note, I see this one having very big "Mark of the beast" discussion potential.

Would certainly think 20 times before deciding to put my gene data on the blockchain though!

I think political action is antithetical to technological progress, but technology is one of our tools to escape the stagnation and regression politics imposes on society.

As long as there are humans striving for individuality through competition, politics and economics will be inevitable.

Yes,.... we need highest level for privacy and security. :)

Interesting read. Thanks.

Good read. Thanks

Wow! Mind blown, great read

thanks @feekayo :)

great...rs and upvote for u....

good guess...all the world leaders are controlled by "someone"...