For sure, it would be vastly better if the business model was such that the users were seen as customers as opposed to a product.
Yeah, it’s a similar model.
Yeah, others corrected me. My understanding was that you had to use the client from the app store to talk to the official server.
oh oops, it looked like this one didn’t go through so I resubmitted :)
Commercial aspect of these platforms is directly at odds with the interest of the users because the platforms treat users as a resource for making profit. I think that the solution has to come from open source platforms that are operated as a public service. It’s the only way to avoid having a conflict of interest.
That does address that concern.
I mean trust specifically in the context of the technology. Things need to be independently verifiable. And thanks for correction regarding the clients, I was under the impression that you could only use the official app with their server. If you can use an open source client that addresses my concern regarding verification.
At the very least we can know that the protocol works as advertised. Since it’s E2E, I think it’s probably reasonable to assume that at least the messages themselves are secure.
What it ultimately comes down to is that truly secure systems cannot be based on trust. The article does a good job outlining all the ways the users have to trust Whisper Systems without any ability to do independent external verification.
Even if we assumed that Signal works as advertised the fact that it’s tied to your phone number is incredibly dangerous. Obviously if this information was shared with the government it will disclose your identity as the article notes. This information can then be trivially correlated with all the other information the government has on you and your social network. Given that Signal is advertised as a tool for activists, that means it creates a way to do mass tracking of activists.
Being centralized is another huge problem given that the service could simply be shut down at any time on government order. If you’re at a protest and rely on Signal it could just stop working.
edit: as people have pointed out, it turns out you can use third party clients
Finally, since the client is a binary distributed by Whisper, it’s not possible to verify that the client and server use the published protocol independently. Since alternative clients aren’t allowed to connect to the server, we can’t test the protocol and have to rely on trust.
Yeah, 2024 does seem to be overstating things. I can see this technology starting to get commercialized by 2024, but it’s going to take time to grow infrastructure to mass produce.
Yeah, it’ll be amazing to finally see something other than silicon used for a computing substrate.
Here’s the content for the article:
Recently, there was another news item that maxed out major websites. Chinese genius scientist Cao Yuan once again published a paper on graphene in the internationally renowned scientific journal “Nature”. It means that China has once again made breakthrough progress in the field of graphene.
As early as 2018, Cao discovered that when two layers of graphene are stacked at 1.1°, superconductivity will occur, and he became the top four scientific figures influencing the world. Then in 2020, two papers were published again in a row, introducing new breakthroughs in the research of magic angle graphene. This breakthrough once again made the world focus on Cao Yuan and graphene.
China’s graphene: the king of new materials, may be able to overtake in the chip field
Why does graphene get so much attention?
First, let’s take a look at what graphene is. Graphene is a two-dimensional carbon nanomaterial composed of carbon atoms. It can play an important role in electronic chips, biomedicine, military industry and other fields. It is called “universal superconducting material” and is also considered to be a good The king of materials.
In 2004, graphene was discovered by scientists. The thickness of single-layer graphene is only 0.355 nanometers, so it is considered a two-dimensional material. The discovery of graphene can be regarded as one of the greatest discoveries of the 21st century. It is the thinnest, hardest nanomaterial known in the world with the best thermal and electrical conductivity. It is hailed as a new strategic innovation that will subvert the future. material. Some people even say that if the 20th century is the century of single crystal silicon, then the 21st century is the century of graphene.
The scientist who discovered it also won the Nobel Prize in 2010. This material can play an important role in the future scientific and technological development of mankind. China has successfully led the world in the field of graphene, which is inseparable from Cao Yuan’s efforts.
Now China’s graphene single crystal technology has welcomed Come breakthrough, and this is not good news for the United States. Because this may shake the US dominance in the field of chips, allowing China to overtake in corners.
Why do you say that? As we all know, the 20th century was a period of rapid development of human science and technology, and many high-tech industries emerged in that era. The development of high-tech is inseparable from chips, and China’s high-tech restrictions are mainly related to chips.
The chips we see today are all made of silicon-based materials, so this type of chip is also called a silicon-based chip. After decades of research, mankind has made tremendous progress in silicon-based chips. However, according to Moore’s Law, the development of silicon-based chips has its own bottleneck. The current chip research and development of mankind is close to the limit of silicon-based chips.
There are countless transistors in the chip. The upgrade of the chip is mainly to add more transistors under the same size. The actual size of the chip is the gate width of the transistor, and 7 nanometers has reached the limit of the gate width. If it continues to shrink, the electrons will not travel enough distance, and the phenomenon of leakage will naturally occur. The smaller the gate, the more serious this phenomenon. The main difficulty of the 5 nanometer technology we see today is how to reduce leakage. And this kind of problem gets more serious as it gets later, and at the same time it becomes more difficult to solve.
Carbon-based chip made of graphene , Can solve this problem. First of all, the processing power of graphene-made chips is 1,000 times that of silicon-based chips. In other words, as long as it can achieve the same technology as silicon-based chips, the performance of the chip can be increased by 1,000 times. In addition, graphene has the characteristics of high conductivity, which is not only more stable than silicon-based chips, but also the problem of leakage is easier to solve.
At present, China’s carbon-based chip research has achieved proud results. The manufacturing technology of carbon-based chips has completely led the world. In 2020, at the International Graphene Innovation Conference in Shanghai, the Chinese Academy of Sciences demonstrated the achievements of China’s carbon-based chips, an 8-inch graphene single crystal wafer. Both in size and performance, it is ahead of other countries in the world. And this product has been able to be produced in small batches, which is a huge blow to the United States.
At present, the United States is firmly blocking China’s silicon-based chip technology, which has slowed China’s progress in this area. The breakthrough of carbon-based chips at this stage indicates that we may complete Overtaking in corners, and no longer relying on silicon-based chips. This of course shakes, the US dominance in chips.
At present, China has successfully developed carbon transistors with only 5 nanometers. This is currently the smallest high-performance transistor in the world. At the same time, through brand-new purification and self-assembly methods, we have been able to develop carbon nanotube materials for semiconductor arrays with higher density and purity. Let us take another big step forward in the research of high-performance carbon-based chips.
Today, the total number of graphene product patents filed by China is far ahead of other countries in the world. The annual output of graphene exceeds 300 tons, and the stable output can better meet the needs of China’s development, and may accelerate the research of China’s carbon-based chips.
The leader in graphene technology will bring China an industry leader. Graphene has a wide range of applications. In addition to the high-tech industries mentioned above, it also plays a huge role in slightly downstream products and fields. According to expert predictions, after 2024, graphene devices are expected to replace complementary metal oxide semiconductor devices. It is used in nanoelectronic devices, photoelectrochemical cells, ultralight aircraft materials and other fields. Even clothing, thermal products, mobile phones, body armor, batteries, etc., can use graphene.
And China’s application in this field has been Achieve very good results. With the advancement of technology and the acceleration of commercial applications, graphene has a huge market prospect. During the 13th Five-Year Plan period, China has already planned to make graphene a leading industry in China.
In 2015, a very clear plan was made for the development of the graphene industry in the next ten years. The goal is to form an industrial scale of tens of billions by 2020, and the overall industrial scale will exceed 100 billion by 2025. This is only the graphene industry in China.
Internationally, various countries have also invested heavily in the graphene industry. In 2013, the European Union listed graphene as a pillar material for emerging technologies in the future, and allocated 1 billion euros for research. The National Natural Science Foundation of the United States has also funded more than 500 graphene studies, hoping to be one step ahead in graphene technology and take the lead in building a graphene industry.
In 2015, the scale of the global graphene industry has reached Reach over 100 billion, and China is far ahead. Now that the scale of the industry has been further expanded, China is still leading in this regard. This is a brand new opportunity for China, not only to seize the global market, but also an opportunity for Chinese technology to occupy the world’s highlands. For more than a century, China has gone from lagging far behind others to standing at the forefront of the world. During this period, there have been countless experiences of getting stuck, and then relying on independent research and development to break through the blockade. The development history of China’s modern history is a sad history of catching up. All this may change in the 21st century.
I use Lemmy, Mastodon, and Pixelfed, my accounts on the other two
I wrote a whole article on the subject. :)
While it was a clever idea, the fundamental flaw with it is that things move around while the squares are meant to represent fixed coordinates.
yeah that’s pretty slick :)
I’m all for discovering better modes of interaction and fixing issues seen in commercial platforms due to perverse incentives used to build those platforms. That said, I think it’s also important to acknowledge what Fediverse has already achieved, and that it is a thriving and growing community right now. We can discuss the current limitations and problems while being optimistic about the future.
As I’ve pointed out earlier, I think there is a natural mechanism that encourages interoperability and we’re already seeing different platforms strive to become compatible at least to some extent. So, I don’t think there’s a real danger of Fediverse splintering.
At the same time, trying out new things does work best within a context of a particular platform. So, what Mastodon is doing with different extensions on ActivityPub is a reasonable way to experiment in my opinion. If these end up being generally useful then they can be added to the W3C spec eventually. My experience is that it’s typically much easier to identify use cases through usage, so you need a working platform with users on it in order to see how to improve things in a meaningful way.
Yeah that was a surprising omissions, also would’ve been interesting to mention gestures as input and how that compares.
I think that some divergence is likely unavoidable, especially in the early stages when people are figuring out what the needs for different platforms are. And different platforms have different ways of interaction that may not translate well to others. For example, Lemmy has threaded conversation while Mastodon doesn’t. So, there isn’t a 1-to-1 mapping here.
As long as ActivityPub covers the lowest common denominator platforms can choose how much additional functionality to add on top, and as long as there’s some form of graceful degradation then it shouldn’t be a huge problem.
Ultimately the more content can be shared between platforms the better, and there is a natural incentive for platform maintainers to try and follow a common path here because everybody benefits from that. Platforms that can talk to others will see more content and user interactions, while those that can’t will necessarily end up being more niche. So, I think there will be a natural selection pressure in the end to build things in an interoperable way.