Continuing the discussion from SAFE URL: "safe://" cross browser support revisited!:
In what ways and to what extent should the Network “straddle” both systems in order to facilitate mass adoption by providing a familiar social dynamic to the average new user?
There’s already an AIM like messenger integrated which is a major draw. Allowing for profile customization with all the frilly and expressive stuff people use to make their experience more intimate is very important. The network could allow easy SAFE to clear site mirroring and data scraping from SAFE (a window in the clear site that pulls data from a SAFE site). This would allow a person to host a site on either network and have them update each other and or have their clear site dynamically updated with desired information from SAFE in a small sub section.
Example: User creates a SAFE site. User then host a site on the clearnet. Both the clear and SAFE site are programmed to update each others site upon modification. So if something happens on the SAFE site it is immediately reflected on the clearnet and vice versa. A pre-allocated amount of safecoin is set for the SAFE site’s continued mirroring costs. One can setup an update interval or a manual authorization mechanism to keep clear users from depleting the admins safecoin. In the case of the scraper, a clear site admin can create a ticker or window within the site that gathers relevant information.
Migrating Facebook friends?
A FB app that connects to the safe network. I authorize the app, it connects my id from my safe-network bound social profile to my FB account, and it loads my list of friends. Then it looks for matches with other safe users.
Same idea for Twitter, etc.
That will pose security risk. Linking things to safe network will de-anonymize you. This is dumb idea.
Not everyone wants anonymity. A user is free to create multiple accounts to disassociate their activities. Saying the idea is dumb without first considering that not everyone will use the network the same way you will = shortsightedness.
I’m fully aware of the consequences, but I had the impression this thread was started with the explicit notion of sacrificing some of the benefits: “clearnet for the sake of mass adoption.” Nobody would force anybody to use such a tool anyway and, as @Tonda mentioned, anybody can have multiple accounts.
This seems like a great idea but may be difficult in practice. Since a traditional site and a SAFE site will have completely different backends/logic/and features (server vs. no server, PHP, .NET, etc. vs SAFE being decentralized and using different protocols, and the like) it seems that someone would have to build their site essentially on two different “platforms” and then get these sites to talk to each other for updates…certainly feasible, but may be difficult…
What if your non-safe site is just proxying the safe site?
Doh!..that would certainly be easier!! Good call!
Just wanted to bump this thread.
I remember reading somewhere that there will be a firefox SAFE search plugin.
Is this still on the cards and how will it effectively work? Will there be a prompt to download the launcher and what specifically will the search results be showing?
True but once they are on SAFE you can make other pub Ids and inform them of whatever level of trust you choose. Let’s be honest most of our “friends” on facebook we don’t really know.
Also I was thinking of that idea for a website porting app. Crowdfund enough money and the app would port a website to SAFE. If you can find the same sites on SAFE then there’s more incentive to move.
Such straddling will not happen. People will use SAFEnet only for things that cannot be done on clearnet. People can already do selfies, what they had for lunch, and (particularly in the case of the females) exhibitionistic accumulation of likes and friends, on Facebook.
This is so duuuh squared that I’m surprised I have to keep pointing it out.
Familiar social interactions … and (particularly in the case of the females) exhibitionistic accumulation of likes and friends
Isn’t that because both parties involved have to be very careful:
Mating Habits
The female bluebird’s habit of multiplying her mates is said to be beneficial rather than detrimental in many situations. One reason points to the fact that females normally do not have a chance of seeing all available mates before picking a mate. So if a female selects a mate from a limited group, a better mate might come by the following day.
Another reason for multiply mating is that the chosen mate may not have the best territory or the best site to build a nest. Or the male that is most helpful may not have the best genes for battling parasites. Other studies have different explanations like the female bluebirds mate with other males in the hope of finding a responsible partner to care for her young notably when her original mate leaves the nest for a long time.
As for the males, they practice various strategies especially the floaters or those males that do not have their own territory. The options of these male bluebirds are to share a female with another male, challenge a male for his territory or replace a male that has died or left the nest for good. The adult survival rate is said to be low among bluebirds thus, many females become widowed or deserted by their mates early on.
To see where straddling and poaching of users would occur, it is sufficient to look at projects that already do, to some degree, what SAFEnet intends to do much better. You don’t have to make shit up that has little or no basis.
Tor and other “anonymous and uncensorable” networks, both for communication and for the hosting of hidden services.
VPNs and proxy services.
Secure, peer-to-peer file storage.
THE crypto-currency (this is a killer app all in itself).
Compute as a utility, and the perfect substrate for IoT.
That’s a good start: one can spend a lifetime working in any of those areas.
Just to be contrary, I think straddling is a good idea. The best technology does its function so well that it becomes ubiquitous, to the point that users don’t think about how well it works … ethernet is one example of a technology that just works… it doesn’t demand that users bend to it’s notions of what it might be useful for, it’s just provides for all.
Any technology that suggests it is for everyone, needs to consider how it makes itself available for everyone.
The clearnet website that sees merit in lower cost SAFE data storage should do that without users being aware of it.
The more trivial we can make using SAFE, the more people will find themselves using it without necessarily having had to jump some hurdle. So, making some product or interface or utility function that is useful, and isn’t only about its being SAFE but is more about being useful and that it is also SAFE is a minor aspect - albeit important added value, then the more people will get sucked in.
Relying only on notions of privacy; security; and freedom, will not draw everyone. So, those not attracted to any idealistic aspect of SAFE, need to be drawn in to using it for different reasons and through different channels. The lazy Facebooker who wants to communicate with their ‘friends’ and sees an options that also happens to tick a box that is privacy; and security, might opt to that because it’s newer, fresher and just works well, rather than an old app that isn’t the newest shiny toy.
So, the straddle perhaps will follow engaging new devs and new types of developer.
There’s a thread somewhere recently with a post I rather liked about the need to engage new devs
… found it… How to attract more developers? - #5 by pds
Make it trivial for webdevs and they will incidentally make their toys SAFE compatible, in ways that users don’t need to care about until such feature catches their attention and draws them in.
It would help if you were a little more specific:
If privacy is not a motivator then you need to spell out what is.
Occupying OSI levels 1-4 (physical up to transport) ethernet does not require authentication and is promiscuous in that sense. SAFE is above that level and is a lot pickier about what it connects to.
I suspect you really mean to reflect that you ‘want’… not need. It’s like should being opinion… there’s no reason everyone must XYZ… some necessarily will be doing ABCs… and why exclude them.
There’s no escaping the fact that, unlike with ethernet, the user is necessarily part of the loop of authentication. Putting the three factors of the user credentials into an automatic system: config file or firmware, severely dilutes the security. That situation is nothing like ethernet, and incompatible with checking a box.
Depends who the ‘user’ is… remember we are entering a time of robots.
Also, if some browser integration occurs, then user might only enter detail once, if it’s not automated and backup encouraged… and the usage there after would be non-intrusive.
If user is visits a clearnet website that stores its data on SAFE, then the user likely won’t even know it.
The point of the OP I expect is that making usage of SAFE trivial, makes it more likely that users will use it… argue if you want over whether they will all make a decision but point stands that lowing the bar so they don’t see a hurdle, will be to everyone’s advantage.
I gave specifics in support of my position, and when challenged, your response is vague hand-waving, and then more hand-waving.