I first thought that most blockchain protocols that use intelligence would focus on showing that the results from their models are correct.. Then I took a closer look at how $NEWT does automation. What I found interesting is that they put a lot of effort into deciding who is allowed to act on your behalf before they think about what actually gets done. This might seem like a thing but it changes how we think about security.
NewtonProtocol does not just do things automatically without thinking. Instead they separate what the user wants from who has the right to do things. This is done with permissions that can be checked. This means that we do not have to trust the person or thing doing the action. We just have to check if what they are doing is what the user said was okay. The way NewtonProtocol is designed is to reduce the power that anyone has to make decisions on their own.
There is a trade-off between being flexible and being secure. If we make the rules too strict it can prevent things from happening if someone makes a mistake or if someone is trying to do something bad.. It also makes it harder to make rules that work well over time. If the rules are too narrow automation does not work well. If they are too broad we are not as safe. Finding this balance may be one of the challenges for NetwonProtocol as it grows.
One thing that is not often talked about is how this design can change how users behave. If users get used to saying what they want using permissions that can be reused of approving each transaction one by one the way we interact with blockchain may change. We may start to think about our accounts in terms of rules of just one transaction at a time. This is a change in how we experience blockchain but it also raises new questions about how we check and update these rules over time.
For me the interesting thing about @NewtonProtocol Mainnet Beta is not just if automation works. It is if giving someone power to act on our behalf is a better way to build trust than how we do things now.
$NEWT #Newt
NewtonProtocol does not just do things automatically without thinking. Instead they separate what the user wants from who has the right to do things. This is done with permissions that can be checked. This means that we do not have to trust the person or thing doing the action. We just have to check if what they are doing is what the user said was okay. The way NewtonProtocol is designed is to reduce the power that anyone has to make decisions on their own.
There is a trade-off between being flexible and being secure. If we make the rules too strict it can prevent things from happening if someone makes a mistake or if someone is trying to do something bad.. It also makes it harder to make rules that work well over time. If the rules are too narrow automation does not work well. If they are too broad we are not as safe. Finding this balance may be one of the challenges for NetwonProtocol as it grows.
One thing that is not often talked about is how this design can change how users behave. If users get used to saying what they want using permissions that can be reused of approving each transaction one by one the way we interact with blockchain may change. We may start to think about our accounts in terms of rules of just one transaction at a time. This is a change in how we experience blockchain but it also raises new questions about how we check and update these rules over time.
For me the interesting thing about @NewtonProtocol Mainnet Beta is not just if automation works. It is if giving someone power to act on our behalf is a better way to build trust than how we do things now.
$NEWT #Newt