A next step is to settle on a model of what you want to get done, and what capabilities the adversaries have.
Perhaps. The issue here is that I’m not so interested in any specific goal, but rather in facilitating emergent complexity. One analogy here is designing Conway’s game of life: I expect that it wasn’t a process of “pick the rules you want, then see what results from those” but also in part “pick what results you want, and then see what rules lead to that”.
Re the Byzantine generals problem, see my reply to niplav below:
I believe (please correct me if I’m wrong) that Byzantine fault tolerance mostly thinks about cases where the nodes give separate outputs—e.g. in the Byzantine generals problem, the “output” of each node is whether it attacks or retreats. But I’m interested in cases where the nodes need to end up producing a “synthesis” output—i.e. there’s a single output channel under joint control.
Perhaps. The issue here is that I’m not so interested in any specific goal, but rather in facilitating emergent complexity. One analogy here is designing Conway’s game of life: I expect that it wasn’t a process of “pick the rules you want, then see what results from those” but also in part “pick what results you want, and then see what rules lead to that”.
Re the Byzantine generals problem, see my reply to niplav below: