@janitor wait… so are you saying you’re going to leave this topic?
EDIT: Dah, I forgot you already left a conversation. I was so excited to put that face on Banner’s body…
2 Likes
What is the point in arguing for ads. Happybeing was trying to engage but the responses were just so dismissive in a way that misrepresented the sorts of points he was trying to make. Not my place to defend other posters but as we’ve seen before there is an agenda:
Ads, keeping alive the potential to coerce end user attention, making sure its possible to set up pay walls, making sure its possible to enhance ID, making sure there can be private end user reputations systems, making sure there is contract (maybe where it isn’t needed.) Its the idea of making the internet safe for people who want to profit from restricting access.
Basically the model some people seem to be arguing for is MaidSafe as a privacy gimmick. People might or might not use the privacy feature but it wouldn’t be anything more than Skype with a private mode and probably have some high premium attached to it.
When I point to agenda its not just a philosophical disagreement, these are generally arguments to substantively diminish the tech. And it bothers me because, I see it making headway sometimes. @Russell, if I am not mistaken you were at some point suggesting encapsulated pay walls. Every piece of content would be surrounded in a smart contract container or some such item on the network and no one could access it unless they paid the content creators prices. I hate that model because it would still allow the collusion and it sets up the massive friction of almost infinite pay walls. We need info to propagate and flow freely. Bots would just strip the containers of the content and dump them into the bay or someone would pay once and then dump for the benefit of humanity. Arguing to increase the digital divide fort he benefit of the supply side to be pro censorship, how is that a valid position on a site that seeks to empower the end user> You’re response was that it allows us to get rid of the distribution middle men. But its still a world of locks and walls. Worse the automated safe coin system that distributes Safecoin for time spent looking at content by Safe end users would merely be a subsidy.
The fair use model will expand and win out. This is not a throw the “baby out the bath water situation.”
almost definitely never said.
EDIT: I may have thrown that out there months ago, or some flavor of that, when I first signed up here. I still think its a good model on some level. Mainly as a way to suggest the cost of something. I firmly believe consumers don’t deserve and shouldn’t have the only say on value. The smart contract was more exciting to more as a way to direct money to the right places without payroll. Using the smart contract as a way of distributing funds to the right parties (sooo many necessary people involved in making things).
The paywall conversation was something else entirely.
Private content on Maidsafe’s network will be vastly more popular than public data. Mark my words on that one. And this is an argument I can’t lose because there won’t be any data on it! 
3 Likes
Interesting new development in species formation thinking that would support your hypothesis.
3 Likes
Health records, student records…got SAFEcoin? 
Has anyone else ever thought they saw the word “divine” even reading @dirvine ?
I thought this, then caught myself,
Then went back and agreed with it 
His whole message, and efforts, are very divine in my perspective
Transcending the greed, prejudices, ignorance, and so many other things that are plaguing our world today…
Yes, very divine indeed!!
Who’s with me?!
Slightly creepy. Slightly.
2 Likes
Mwahahaha!!!
Be very afraid!!
Lol 
But seriously, us yunginns need our role models… Don’t hate. Mr. Irvine is right up there among Elon Musk and Tony Stark, for me at least 
2 Likes