the-laughing-monkey / cicada-platform Goto Github PK

Is this system able to protect rights in spite of the majority's vote?

For example, what if the majority votes to restrict free speech? Or to confiscate property from others? Or to persecute an ethnic minority. Etc.

Some things are wrong no matter how many people vote for them.

Just curious how the system will account for that.

currently im reading whitepaper and wondering about the liveness of this project. is it dead? are there any successors or alternatives??

It seems they are ages ahead: https://horizonstate.com/

Hello !
Nice idea and project, thanks for starting it !
When reading the introduction about one possible way to unique identify each human been using it's iris this question came to my mind:

Does the iris of a living been change with age ? If so how to update it's unique id ?

Cheers !

https://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-possible-for-one-person-to-have-two-different-sets-of-dna-here-s-how-it-happens

Is this project purely theoretical at this point or is anyone working on code? If so, then when might there be an alpha release?

Hey guys, are you at http://ceptr.org/ too? Project seems so much related.

How do you manage, that no one can come to me and say: "Let's sit in front of your computer and I'll watch how you vote what I want, and afterwards I'll give you 200 Bucks"?

Hey there

If the creation of the HUID is decentralised, what stops an attacker from enrolling fake HUIDs?

Presumably, there is some soft/hardware that takes retinal scans / some other input and generates identities and these join a decentralised network, what stops an attacker from spoofing that kind of system and generating fake identities? The attacker would control a set of fake keys and a new identity, which can be used to swing votes, mine coins, etc.

Unfortunately, I saw nothing in the whitepaper that actually addresses the issue of Sybil attacks, and the whole system is based on these HUIDs.

Sorry to have to ask this, but we need to consider all scenarios.

Let's say a user becomes deceased, and their will is to grant their account balance to their spouse, children, etc. How is that transaction requested and validated?

As a secondary question, if a user is murdered and the offender somehow has access to their password (many people keep a physical or digital list of their passwords), How do we prevent the offender gaining access to their account?

I'd go for using more than one biometrical factor and would combine them intelligently during authentication. Each factor could have a fuzzy confirmation logic to it, allowing for gradual changes.

In addition to biometrical factors I'd also add non-biometrical factors.

In my approach an authentication would require X out of Y factors successfully confirmed, whereas Y >> X and both do contain additional non-biometrical factors, the relevance and validity of which still has to be thought over in detail.

Depending on the purpose of any given authentication case, X could vary in number and allowed share of non-biometrical factors.

There should be an algorithm allowing for gradual changes of single biometrical factors to allow for factors which do change over time.

Reasoning: Single biometrical factors might either change over time and/or get lost, e.g. if linked to retina scan alone one could lose their eyes (perhaps even forcefully). A composite approach is harder to develop, however it would increase integrity and security sharply.