For all who did not see the confrontation which took place , the interesting trigger for this confrontation was when Vitalik challenged the technical opinion put forth by Craig Wright. The claim Vitalik says is that Craig Wright argued that making the Lightning Network work is as hard as solving a discrete logarithm problem. This kind of problem is known as an NP hard problem.
What is a discrete logarithm problem and what does polynomial time mean?
An NP Hard problem is a non-deterministic polynomial-time problem. To understand how this works just take a look at this video:
As you can see from the video, it's not practical due to time limitations to solve the discrete logarithm problem if the prime mod is large enough. This is the kind of encryption which PGP/GNUPG uses and is the kind of algorithm behind for example public key cryptography. The security of these forms of cryptography is based on the fact that mathematics proves them to be NP Hard. The security is based on statistics, on the probability that an adversary could randomly guess by trial and error to find the right number.
Now if we look at the Lightning Network then in my opinion there are challenges in implementing it. But I do not think "as hard as" applies to this unless there is a proof (math) which shows that the Lightning Network cannot work based on the same probability statistics that back the security of discrete logarithm problem hardness. Hardness is hard because there is some practical constraint which makes it hard, such as the amount of time before the universe is expected to die. If we have an infinite universe where you have infinite time then any cryptography based on the discrete logarithm problem can be solved, along with most forms of cryptography, but because the universe as we know it is based on the laws of physics, and is indeed finite (unlike the infinite tape of a Turing machine), it means the practical security of these hard problems are based on the correct math in terms of probability.
Summary:
- Done correctly, an NP hard problem is secure based on the fact that it costs more time to solve than the universe offers (practically unsolvable).
- Public key cryptography is secure if the keysize is large enough. For example integer factorization is not solvable efficient by any known mathematics.
- Discrete logarithm problems are known as being hard and are probably unsolvable efficiently.
- Is Lightning Network proven to be so hard to implement correctly that it would take more time than the universe offers to do it right? If yes then Craig Wright is correct, if no then his statement is wrong. Of course this depends on what we mean by implementing it correctly. If it is merely according to the specification then of course on the face of it then it's wrong but if we are talking about doing it in a way which upholds some principles or goals outside of the specification? Who knows. Craig Wright also claims Lightning Network can by Sybil attacked based on the topology. My question is just because it can be attacked doesn't mean that it can be shut down or that it's not resilient enough to survive the attack so does the math show it can be attacked in a way in which something is lost or it cannot recover? Btw Craig Wright is a Bitcoin Maximalist.
I wish I knew enough about mathematics and cryptography to better assess which one of them is right. Craig Wright says that his organization is going to obtain so many patents that Bitcoin Cash will be able to block other platforms from using technology that will be unique to BCH, which he believes will eventually become the dominant cryptocurrency. On the other hand, it's hard to argue with someone like Vitalik Buterin, who is backed up in this squabble by numerous experts who say Wright's arguments are technobabble.
It is like two religious sects which don't get along yet each believing they know the gospel truth.
Yes, time will tell which side is right in the long run but I'd prefer to know the answer now.
nice article
I like your posts because I always find something useful and new, like reading an encyclopedia-)
I am erudite as a result of reading a lot. I also have experience in these matters (practical experience). The other thing I do is observe and learn from observation. I do this on a daily basis, for years, and so it may seem like I know a lot.
The truth is I know a little about a lot of things. I do not know everything about anything. I'm fully aware of the limits of my knowledge (my own ignorance). I am constantly trying to overcome those limits (my own ignorance) by using whatever tools I can build or have built in.
All that being said I do not intend to blog forever on Steemit. I've set a goal which I'm trying to reach before I determine it's time to quit. Blogging has been a substitute for writing books, has allowed me to share some of my ideas, my thoughts, has allowed me to have debates with an audience and have those debates saved for all time. Through the blockchain people can see my process of how I form my opinions, how I think, how I learn.
have you experienced writing books? or maybe you'll try to do it after you leave Steemit?
and what is your goal here, if it's not a secret?
writing is my passion as well, it's a kinds of soul relief when you can express what you think or what makes you worry in words.
Actually, I was going to write a book some years ago, not a commercial one, just for myself, just expressing my feelings and thoughts about something. For now I've decided to wait till I get more life experince because now I feel I'm changing every year (crazy period of inner transformation).
You're a deep and interesting person to speak with, because you have very different kinds of knowledge, touching many spheres. It's not necessary to be a professor or a scinetist just to be a wise and intelligent person.
I had intended to write a book, whitepaper and more. I ended up not doing that because Steemit gave me a similar outlet with the same potential for profit as I would have earned from writing a book.
I don't know if I'll write a book in the future. What do you think is a topic you would want me to write about? The problem with my thoughts, feelings, opinions, is that if I solidify it into a book then it may be outdated by the time people buy the book. My opinions change very quickly, and my feelings don't really have much value in the market as everyone feels however they feel.
So the only reason I write is to educate people and encourage people to seek knowledge. If I'm right or wrong will be discovered by myself and readers over time but the point is to encourage the pursuit of knowledge and the embrace of science. Personal development is my prime goal not self expression.
yes, I do understand what you mean! The same about me, I can describe something and tell something, giving my evaluation and personal judgements, but when I finish the whole book, I can just "grow" and change my mind and opinion. That's the reason why I still haven't started-)
I know you too little, it's better to say - I don't know you at all to have an idea what you can describe the best in your book-)but I can say for sure that you have an ability to inspire-)
There's so much trash in the nowadays life, and so few "seeds" of something valuable and really important. In your blog I always can find something useful and that's why I like to come here. You just give pieces of info but at the samt time it shows people how huge the world is, and how much we don't know yet. We can, and we must seek for something new every day.
Giving inspiration and motivation is not less important than just teaching definite things. So it can be one of the ideas for the book - motivate people to develop, to study, to "grow" mentally, to find new sides of their souls and develop new skills.
Is it close to you, or you prefer something more detailed?
Craig Wright is an imposer and a fraud, I don't see any reasons to listen to his BS
Whether he is Satoshi or not, he does know what he is talking about on certain subjects.