I’m sure i remember someone mentioning an ebay style app, but cant find it… I’m not claiming ownership of such an obvious idea.
So many people are using facebook groups to sell things nowadays rather than ebay due to the fees. And the last time I sold a car it was about £60 for an advert on Autotrader for a couple of weeks on their website… I’m sure users would be eager to have the ability to buy/sell things for fractions of a MAID…
Safe://Buy.Sell
I’m sure the current devs on board have a few ideas they are working on. An ebay type replica will reap the relevant dev a small fortune. Pity it won’t be me
Something for the CEP initiative maybe?
Well, safe is anonymous and private, so what you are describing would quickly turn into silkroad 2.0 unless you want to hire a team of staff to police it. I don’t doubt it would make someone a fortune, but it would be a brave person who did it and I doubt you’d hear anything about it until after it launched. It’ll happen though ofc.
I worry about these CEPs because people will pay money and then the API will be updated in a huge way in the next few days / weeks and then it’s kind of a lot paid for a broken app
at least with my guys it’s hourly so I can afford to code around these ever-changing SAFE API systems but if it’s a lump sum like that it’s kind of a big loss for the community & MaidSafe as they fund these things
that’s why I think the CEPs only really will make sense for marketing and things like that, until we get to a radically different place with the APIs, than we are in today. For example, 10/13 of the apps I’ve made for SAFE so far don’t work anymore, for this reason
Thoughts?
What is wrong with a silkroad 2.0?
You can have one of two things:
Free information allows for UNDERSTANDING the problem. Lack of free information allows the few the privilege of understanding the problem. However, the few are less trustworthy than the many.
We must put our faith in humanity, rather than putting our faith within a smaller group within humanity, because the smaller the group the more easily corruptible it becomes.
You cannot have “half-ass” decentralization, because if it CAN become corrupted by the few, then it WILL.
I think a lot of apps will need to be policed in order for them to function properly on the network.
I don’t believe things will just work because we want them too and everyone will do the right thing with the network.
There will be people doing dodgy stuff so there will need to be some sort of policing for a lot apps I would imagine.
We touched on it ages ago when we discussed the possibility of my kids typing in a safe website address and getting one letter wrong and ending up on an unsavoury site by accident. I would want to be able to use a filtering and content restriction app for their accounts… that would need a team to constantly update it I would imagine.
I know others disagree and think that there shouldn’t be any type of filtering or restriction like this, but until kids are mature enough I would like that ability to keep them safe on the network. I wouldn’t just leave my 3 year old in the garden for a few hours with the attitude of “Ah, she will probably be fine, I don’t need to monitor her, and if something does happen then nevermind because that’s just the risk you take if you want true freedom”.
I’m not suggesting applying this to the whole network, normal adult users would use it unrestricted.
If the network was only for security conscious individuals and just to give whistleblowers a protected platform from which to speak, then restrictions and filters clearly don’t have a place.
But the long term vision is to replace the current internet, so there needs to be accommodations to protect young and vulnerable people.
This isn’t all aimed at you Jabba, just preempting posts about Me wanting something like the great Chinese firewall!
Of course, it is perfectly reasonable to have centralized control over your kids, and there should certainly be a dapp that provides the filtering functionality that you desire for them.
However, a dapp alone would be insufficient to provide this. You would have to give them a machine that restricted their access at the level of the operating system.
Web 3.0, assuming it is decentralized, will have NO restrictions, ZERO.
Therefore you have to trust that they have no access to the PHYSICAL infrastructure necessary to request information freely. Therefore. you will have to limit their access to a particular machine with very particular access rights.
Of course, they could always go to “that one friend’s house” who has access to an unrestricted machine, or they could buy or build their own machine.
My only point, is that it is impossible to build a TRULY decentralized system, that provides this functionality through software alone. It is a physical access problem. The decentralized network, by definition, cannot solve it.
So you have millions and millions of items being sold that are legit by some standard, and then there are a few thousand or 10’s of thousands of non-legit by that standard, How is that silk road 2.0
Do you not think illegal items are not sold on ebay now? They just use different terms.
So then if we have a ebay style app on the SAFE network and there are truly internationally illegal items then the police will have to do as they did with silk road and do actual police work. The items are physical and so that is where they will have to work from. Just like happens elsewhere in the world where they have less leads.
Thus you introduced purposed censorship which governments and the rich can leverage to prevent the poor (us) receiving valuable information. Or participating in safe and secure access to world information for everyone and not just the privileged
Now if you use a filter when viewing any APP including this market place APP the that is the way to go and wholeheartedly agree is needed for some.
Oh I’m sure they will find a way! But I would hope that would be later on in their teens!
I’m not expecting kids to never see adult content, I mean from my own youth there we always the heroes that dumped jazz mags in the woods. And then Ben’s mum and dad were divorced so his dad used to buy him 18+ games to compensate, which we would play until all hours.
We didn’t have the internet though where everything is immediate, so I’d just like some sort of control when they’re younger.
We’re essentially at the start of the internet again and I guess the users will decide which apps/sites are successful… I’m sure there will be battles between competing developers.
And I guess it won’t be long before the established companies start taking note and develop ports of their existing products if the network starts to take off.
Just want to point people to the existing topic about illegal content on the SAFE network
Please continue ALL discussions concerning illegal content (including items for sale) in the topic for it.
Since it is a contentious subject we have decided its best to discuss it in the one topic so people can be on the same thought pattern and not repeat the same things over and over again. I’ll leave the above as it is perhaps relevant to this topic, but no more thank you
https://forum.autonomi.community/t/recent-questions-about-safes-societal-implications/7146
On that particular app/site purposed ‘censorship’ has been introduced yes, but the network as a whole hasn’t.
You could still access uncensored alternative versions of these sites if you wanted to, information would likely be readily available to identify where a company/government was stepping over the line. As to whether users would do anything with that information is another matter…
My bad. Too late at night and I got crossed purposed.
I still feel any censorship has to be done on your machine.
I would say any good market place App will have built in selective filters for the user to chose the types of items/content they desire. In other words selectable censorship that you as a parent can impose for yourself and/or your kids
Maybe a net Nanny app for CEP too? A module for the browser to filter by a community maintained black list would do it nicely.
Make that silk road 4.0, 2 and 3 have already come and gone. But quite frankly I don’t see a problem with this and as you say it’s rather inevitable. Those who do or do not believe in policing such a market seem to boil down to a difference in values more than anything else. So perhaps when we accept that we CAN’T force others not to trade in what we don’t approve in or censor what we don’t like them to say then the associations of trust can be based on what one may or may not privately or publically filter from one’s sphere rather than what one advocates enforcing on others.
What if we substituted the word “contraband” with “religious material”? Say for example you wanted to filter out bible thumping missionaries out of your market or filter. But a lot of religious people sell good stuff. So you can either filter by individual listings or filter out users entirely. If you do the former you might just get rid of all the religious stuff (no Christmas?) but if you do the latter you might be making a major anti religious political statement. Granted you could make an account to sell a particular kind of good but the more you diversified the more you’d open yourself up to getting pissed at one item and filtering out all the rest.
What I’m getting at here is instead of punishing those for not being like oneself and adhering to one’s values instead one should seek out those that do adhere to one’s values and simply filter out those that do not. I don’t mean this in the strictest sense mind you but rather in terms of code and how rules would be formed. Like attracts like rather than conditional punishments of moderation.
Gosh nothing at all?! I didn’t even slightly infer that it was a bad thing, just that it would be a brave person who made it and I doubt they would advertise themselves or their project publicly.
You are preaching to the converted RE centralisation, that’s what led most of us here in the first place. I want a system where we can hold each other to account if we impinge on each other’s freedom, not where we have to obey crazy laws and rules thought up by a few people with an agenda.
The great thing about SAFE is user choice. If you want safer apps for your kids you can choose those. For folks who wants freedom they can have it too. I agree that some users do want sites that are policed in some way, so I’d assume the market will provide what they want. I don’t think any central party can swoop in as protector though, that never ends well, not in flesh-and-bones society and not in the digital world. Just my 2 cents ofc.
I agree with @Jabba and I don’t think he believes it’s bad at all. Based off how I know James he is a freedom/liberty lover like most of us here. That can take many different forms of course but I think the point was it could very quickly and easily be taken over by “nefarious” activity in short order if not policed or moderated. Not that it’s a bad thing etc but you better believe if that happened the law will want to find you to make an example of you. That’s why if you just build a simple no restrictions version of eBay, you would definitely have to be brave.
Exactly Nigel.
People will gravitate towards the things they can’t get elsewhere, the USPs of SAFE. No bad thing. I even considered getting a ‘free market’ built myself, but there’s a difference between railing against the system and painting a target on your back. I have kids, I’m not brave enough to walk that path.
Yes, you’re definitely right. By doing so it means that you are in full control of any restrictions on content that you can access. It shouldn’t be a developer who decides what is and isn’t appropriate on your behalf.
Yep, perfect. Although there would need to be several sources to choose from to suit personal values… and to hopefully avoid manipulation from outside influences!
Whilst we will all likely be using Decorum or similar, Do you think there’s a risk that the likes of Alphabet, Facebook etc will invade the network and the general public just go with what they know and giveaway their newly gained anonymity and privacy again in order to easily sign up to their services? And then they have control of the masses again…