You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Using trust-lines as an anti-sybil mechanism in Swarm Redistribution
It is trivial to create fake debts and pay them.
I have looked at these models in the past and always found them come up short.
It is trivial to create fake debts and pay them.
I have looked at these models in the past and always found them come up short.
How would you also get fake value for those fake debts? For example, in swarm redistribution, the dividends you get in the form of basic income are only useful is they come from an account that has liquidity in the trust network, since you get a tiny tiny IOU from the account that was taxed.
Fake accounts would leech dividends from humans who, in some way over lines of separation, have chosen to trust the scammer. Would the fake accounts distinguish themselves if you look the the credit clearance?
My fake account 1, My fake account 2 and My fake account 3 has trust lines only to Me, would it be easy for You to read that they are fake accounts, based on how they use their dividends, and how the credit clearing would be centralized around Me?
Me and my fake accounts are leeching dividends from You who has let Me into the trust network of Merchant
@dan your comment inspired the idea to do "symmetric" swarm redistribution, the original idea from 2012 was that each person gave to many, with a symmetric design (from 2017), each person only interacts with people they trust and have credit lines to/from
https://steemit.com/res-currency/@johan-nygren/resilience-mutual-currency-with-swarm-redistribution-on-a-person-to-person-ledger
@dan also, Steemit led to this work last year, potential solid evidence that Australopithecus speciated on Danakil (Lumiere, 1981)
https://www.docdroid.net/ml9yKZT/on-the-origin-of-the-species-danakil-as-the-galapagos-of-pliocene-east-africa-2.pdf