>>21271244
I'm not an academic, I hate academics. That's why the confusion. I can see that you're a academic and that your level of theoretical knowledge is far beyond mine. I just know how to program in like 15-20 programming languages, I'm not involved in a deep level on any of them. I have basic understandings of AI, robotics, multi-threading, web design, back-ends, mobile applications, ... I mostly worked in Go, VueJS, python, C#.
Now that you provided an example I do understand.
You're interested in "How do i know if this faggot is passing me random bullshit, instead of actually computing what I want?" The answer is rather simple. The worker actually doesn't know what it's computing for the client, it just knows what it has to do to get the actual result. That's how TEE works. The data is encrypted in a way that the worker can work on it, but it doesn't know what it's working on... I gave a link to the youtube channel of iExec a few posts above. I know there's a few videos where Gilles Fedak explains this. I cba to find it really, but if you make your own research you can check this is true.
The 3) point. ah sorry, I miss understood that. I have no clue in all honesty. And your point is valid and good. But I would argue since they're in this shit they've got that shit covered. Since your point is a big concern of course. And they probably wouldn't ignore it. And due to Gilles Fedak being a pioneer in cloud computing and distributed computing itself (you can check google schoolar for his research papers if you're interested. I recommend you do) he probably knows what he's doing. I can trust him at least that much
This point) Also the results aren't on the blockchain (which would be hilariously expensive), so whatever you said about GDPR isn't true either.
Yes they are. The result itself gets verified twice, as i already mentioned earlier. First by RLC, then ETH. The off-chain part isn't verified ofcourse, because as I explained earlier it's in a TEE