DAO 不是网络极端主义的法外之地

This week's Wired magazine claimed that decentralized autonomous organizations are becoming a gathering place for dangerous groups, but it said that this article misunderstood the actual function and use. Well-known magazines recently published an article claiming that decentralized autonomous organizations may become the next major gathering place for online extremism. The article wrote that 2008 may be the year when neo-Nazis, jihadists and conspiracy theorists turned their utopian vision of creating a self-governing country into reality. Not in the real world, but in the form of decentralized autonomous organizations, the author of the article is an academic scholar who studies extremism and writes books about European political movements. It is said that she has also infiltrated several such organizations, including parties and voice chats that participate in public propaganda. These organizations include highly controversial and public activities, such as France and Germany. It is relatively simple to conduct academic research on such extremist groups because most of the participants are a group of game houses addicted to role-playing. Publicly publishing inflammatory content to gain attention has almost no basic awareness of cyber security. One indicator that can judge whether extremist groups are as dangerous as Hamas or Hezbollah is whether the servers used by the group are located in the United States. In the United States, the FBI can identify the users on these servers within one day through subpoenas, and even in an emergency, there is no need to subpoena them at all. Many companies will voluntarily disclose these records in life-threatening situations, which is particularly vulnerable. This kind of attack is because the organization operates through a group, but is a social media company headquartered in San Francisco. Its application of the same name displays all users' communications in clear text, that is, unencrypted form, so these communications can be freely disclosed to law enforcement agencies and often disclosed, just like the alleged right-wing coding mentioned in the online article. Most of them also rely on community management and publicity, and the allegations are lack of supporting evidence, claiming that it may become an extremist stronghold, but there are many loopholes in her argument, which is hard to make people feel. Convinced, first of all, she only mentioned those who disclosed group information on the Internet, such as working with these organizations on an American-based platform. This is certainly worth studying, but not all of them are so convincing. The more convincing evidence should be that anyone mentioned in the article used encryption protocols instead of communication. The ideal situation is to provide direct evidence to prove that they were used by such organizations for illegal purposes, such as the Taliban meeting the requirements. They did not use two of the two standards, but mainly used encryption protocols. However, as far as I know, even if the Taliban have full autonomy within the territory of Afghanistan, they are free to choose any software tools and do not use them on the line. I continue to write how dangerous it will be if the network spray uses cooperation to launch activities to intervene in elections. Extremist activities may challenge the rule of law, threaten minorities and destroy institutions regarded as the basic pillar of democratic system. Another risk is that it can become a safe haven for extremist movements and enable users to It is absurd to bypass the government supervision and the monitoring activities of the security department. First of all, she studies that members of such extremist organizations live freely in western society. Although their views may be unacceptable to the mainstream society, it is not illegal to hold and express extreme views in the United States at least. In fact, extremists' public statements will help the early warning of law enforcement agencies. They will closely monitor the existence of these forums, and even if they are legal, they will really regard the existence of these communities as a threat to society. Since the extremist research and misinformation research circles in academia, the press and their political allies, these are ideological opponents of freedom of speech. The reality is that in the real world, if you are stupid enough to openly plan serious crimes or seriously challenge the rule of law, law enforcement agencies are likely to have mastered everything about you, and you will eventually go to jail. When we see that those who are peaceful, proficient in encryption technology and non-racist also use similar communication tools, we should not conclude that this will happen. Turning an encrypted community into an extremist doesn't mean being friendly to extremists, or even being suitable for extremists. This can only show that, like many other online communities, participation is more important than confidentiality. It is one of the most popular social media applications in the world, and even organizations including political movements will not create any safe haven, let alone bypass government supervision and security service monitoring activities. In fact, on the contrary, what do I actually do? After the first prototype of Ethereum, I have provided consulting services for many companies. The main function is not to communicate, but to manage the intelligent contracts on the chain, and to decide when to exercise some administrator-level permissions on the contracts, such as setting interest rates or changing the function set. Most of the self-governing software applications are not yet mature, and only to sell encrypted tokens, provide the founders with runways, develop new codes, and find product market fit points, do they hastily add a few elements. The purpose is, for example, to achieve the product market fit once it is launched, or to be very close to it. Token holders will regularly participate in voting on the proposal. Even in this case, the relevant voting discussion will take place in an open governance portal and be supervised by token holders. They often do not disclose their identity to create user accounts for participation, although many large token holders who have the ability to influence the outcome of the proposal will choose to disclose their own information. Generally speaking, when a change proposal is finally agreed and implemented, it has already passed. There have been a lot of public discussions. Most of these debates take place in the open, and law enforcement agencies can easily monitor them if they want. Why is it not suitable for extremism? Fear may become a hotbed of extremism, but this fear lacks basis. First of all, there is nothing special about social media, which is no different from the existing communication methods of social media. More importantly, the technical characteristics make it difficult to use it for crimes and hidden activities. Intelligent contracts are open and transparent, and data can be found in the blockchain where most of the mainstream chains are located. The unencrypted transaction data can be directly used by other analysis companies to assist law enforcement agencies in monitoring. The main function is to coordinate the status changes of smart contracts. These status changes will only be submitted to the chain after the members have reached a general consensus on the changes. Usually, the content will go through a long and arduous debate. In contrast, the spread of extremist ideas usually adopts a high volume, high speed and low interference way to spread inflammatory memes and propaganda. This way is not economical and feasible in the chain because it is expensive to fill a block of pictures and update the distributed finite state machine, that is, the blockchain. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=61129