I am not going to respond to every point of yours and pick it part. It will turn up being a jumble of recursive nonsense. It is obviously you are not of a strong technical background. You don't understand how mining works and why that will not be a app. You also don't understand how TOR, Dropbox, or what Amazon EC2 provides.
Mining can be virtualized. A virtual machine is an app which simulates some hardware. You do need enough computing power to do it but there is a lot a computing power and it's not hard to create virtual machine instances which simulate certain hardware.
My technical knowledge is strong, I may not always be the best at explaining. Amazon EC2, Tor, Dropbox, all could become decentralized applications. The hardware can be abstracted or separated from the software in such a way that the hardware could be decentralized nodes which do the processing, storage, or whatever. If you'd like to discuss how it could work I can go into that and if you or anyone find technical errors or my explanations are not good then feel free to correct me.
However, the quote above shows why people may not take you are seriously as you'd like. You are claiming you've studied the code in some significant manner and thats how you know it is good to go. Thats obviously not true.
Some of the code I will admit is a bit hard to read because it's written in a way where it's not commented or it's not easy to figure out what it's doing. The overall design looks good, the important parts of the code look good.
Here is the RUDP portion of the code which you can review for yourself.
https://github.com/maidsafe/MaidSafe-RUDP/blob/master/src/maidsafe/rudp/transport.ccIt looks mostly good to me (there is one strange Segfault bug but it doesn't look critical). I will admit I have not reviewed every little detail of the code (there is quite a bit of code). What I did is skimmed through it and looked for certain design decisions they went with. Does that mean there could be bugs that I missed? Of course I wouldn't catch everything but if enough people look at the code I'm convinced that one of us will catch something if something is there.
Dropbox, do you have the code so we can review it for backdoors?
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-security/researchers-reverse-engineer-the-dropbox-client-what-it-means/The fact that we can review the MaidSafe code means we can crowd audit it. It's a risk to use the code in the testing phase before it's audited but considering we are risk takers I don't see why it's a big deal if you're willing to risk your money already.
I realized some time ago, your point behind arguing is not to exchange/improve ideas. It is purely promotional. You just sort of make up stuff as you go and ignore corrections to your blatant mistakes. Rinse and repeat ...
If you find a mistake and can prove it I don't mind saying I'm wrong. But you're not saying anything to prove or disprove. You're saying that MaidSafe is not like Tor while I'm saying MaidSafe is better than Tor. MaidSafe is better than Tor and Freenet combined and works at a lower level than both.
Tor operates on the application layer (OSI layer 7). Freenet is also the application layer (OSI layer 7). MaidSafe is on the transport layer (OSI layer 4). It does not run on top of TCP/IP, it has it's own RUDP transport protocol. Tor uses onion routing to keep you anonymous but it's still running on the classic Internet, while Freenet when I last checked uses encryption at the application layer to try to create a Cipherspace or secure channel. It has had limited success but a lot has been learned from it and it seems MaidSafe developers in specific has learned quite a bit from the design.
But I will stand by my opinion that MaidSafe is better than Tor and Freenet combined. If you think I'm wrong show me otherwise.
Uhhh, I'm not the one thinking maidsafe will not use IP addresses. You have no clue, absolutely 0. I may be wrong about the economics, because I don't fully get their argument/graph. I thought it was based on something akin to Moore's law, but I think their graph is based on adoption rates. So I made a mistake there perhaps.
MaidSafe does not need IP addresses. You have no IP address on the MaidSafe platform. The IP address that you get from your ISP is for the regulated Internet. MaidSafe is a decentralized anonymous Internet platform. If no IPs exist on MaidSafe then it's pure Cipherspace. It's like the Tor hidden services only without the IP addresses to track. If you have decentralized meshnet ISPs which will accept Safecoins to provide access then you would have no IP address at all to track and if you use a traditional ISP they'd at best could know you use MaidSafe but still would not able to track you.
I've looked at it and I cannot figure out how anyone could monitor it. How would you monitor something which is encrypted? If there are no IP addresses where do you start? I suppose you could try to monitor at the ISP's which people will connect through but I don't see how the ISPs could know who you are and what you're doing on MaidSafe since its pure Cipherspace.
https://github.com/maidsafe/MaidSafe-RUDP/wikihttps://github.com/maidsafe/MaidSafe-Encrypt/blob/master/src/maidsafe/encrypt/self_encryptor.ccI may be wrong about the economics, because I don't fully get their argument/graph. I thought it was based on something akin to Moore's law, but I think their graph is based on adoption rates. So I made a mistake there perhaps.
The graph is about adoption rates but also Moore's law. It basically makes the case that Moore's law will result in the costs of computing resources decreasing, there will be an equilibrium point where Safecoin rises in value in correlation with the decrease in costs of computing resources.
I believe this correlation is going to result in an increase in buying power/purchasing power for all who hold Safecoins at the time. So if a Safecoin can buy more computing resources on MaidSafe than any other similar service then you could mine most profitably on MaidSafe which means miners would want to buy Safecoins rather than buy a bunch of Digital Ocean instances.
I also want to say that I'm not making these posts for promotional purposes. While I do hold Safecoins, I had to spend my money to get those coins and I would not have done that if I did not believe in the potential. My opinion when the IPO first happened was that it was shady, it was unfair the way it happened, they botched it. Just because they botched the IPO it does not mean their technology isn't the best out there.
A week ago I was defending Ethereum when others were asking why would the Bitcoin association go with Ethereum. At the same time I told people I probably wont take part in the Ethereum IPO because it's a bad deal for investors due to the insanely high inflation rate.
What I say about MaidSafe, Ethereum, and Blackcoin's multi-pool idea, are all based on my own research and conclusions. If you'd like to believe that my conclusions are wrong that is fine but it's not going to change my opinion and in either case it's not "promotion" to admire technologies other than Bitshares.
From Business point of view:
Cloud hosting for mining purposes should be beneficial for the user for short periods of time (if at all). After all why rent something for X if you can set it up to mine for you and receive Y>X.
If you're running a data center then you would make plenty of Safecoins just rending out resources. If you have a lot of Safecoins but don't want to buy a mining rig and pay for the electricity, maintenance, and other issues associated with that then a virtual machine makes sense.
How do you think people are mining Primecoin right now? It's either botnets or in the cloud else I cannot see how it would be profitable to mine.
While it is not impossible the sum to be bigger than the parts, you still have not pointed to anything of the MaidSafes design that makes you think so. Saying “It will do this and this. You will see!” is the only argument that you have offered so far.
Any technology like this is going to be difficult to explain. The same arguments used to "hype" Ethereum are the arguments which "hype" MaidSafe. I think it's going to be too difficult for me to make a compelling argument right now because without the apps it's hard to reveal the vision. I'm looking at the technology and thinking that theoretically it could do X, but that doesn't mean it will even if it is theoretically possible.
From Technical point of few:
>>“A virtual machine could simulate any hardware you want to mine with.”
Yes, I have my virtual quantum computer running on my digital (i.e, regular) computer, the code is written in C.
In theory, not in practice. In theory if the underlying computer is powerful enough it can simulate or emulate some machine. The question is how much processing power will be in the MaidSafe network? I don't know the answer to that question but I know Bitcoin has a lot of processing power.
If we are talking general purpose CPUs then if you have a lot of them and if they can do parallel processing then you can mine a lot with just that. GPUs are another processor which if there are enough of them working in parallel you can mine with that. I don't imply that you can turn a regular computer into a quantum computer because thats not physically possible.
But if you have many regular computers in huge data centers, you can allocate the processing power using virtual machines. You can design the virtual machine to have as many CPUs as you want or run as many instances as you want. It can be any architecture that you want and there are advantages to this. I wont go further into this, let's find out if my speculation is correct in a few months when the first decentralized applications are running on the MaidSafe network.
It does not run fast as a quantum computer should… so I will take the following steps (adding more layers of abstraction) until I get the results. First I will move it from my local machine to a virtual server. Then I will move it to MaidSafes’ virtual ‘virtual disk’ and if this does not work, or for a good measure, I will rewrite the code in Java…
That’s my idea? What do you think?
You're working backwards. A virtual machine does not take away the need to have physical hardware underneath. So the physical hardware is going to still be sitting in some data center.
The point is that if I want to mine on BOINC, and use 5000 CPUs to do it, then in theory I could do that over the MaidSafe network. In theory it would be cheaper on MaidSafe than anywhere else. Check back on my posts a few months from now and if nothing I said happens then I'll admit I was wrong.