Now what I say is IF funds allocated to hosting then it’d have to be the fund (maybe via Maidasafe books) pay for the hosting and people become volunteers who receive nothing for managing testing nodes on the machines. I am sure most countries would not see the volunteers as having taxable events. For Maidsafe its income offset by expendure resulting in no tax payable (at least it would be in AU). But only IF you were to do this.
Of course my thoughts earlier were for later beta when things settle down api etc wise
Just to be clear, I’m not looking for a handout on hosting costs - well not any more. I can run 100 nodes on Hetzners cheapest for less than 3 beers a month now. So thats no longer any great concern.
We just need a bit of patience until the API can get finalised, as well as holepunching so nodes from home is available for all.
And lots more folk just simply uploading and downloading. Anybody can do that, even if the user experience is underwhelming for now.
There is an argument the provider of the facility to publish data can be held responsible for not removing that capability (censoring) when the data is found to be inconsistent with law.
I find it pathetic, personally, but the argument is defo there
I don’t want MS to take the risk, but I don’t see how this would apply to anyone other than MS doing the following:
publishing a standard (eg for a DNS)
providing a library which implements the standard
creating an app that uses it to publish data (cf. WordPress)
That’s like saying the author of blog software like Wordpress is responsible for content published using it.
I get how MaidSafe doing it might be a problem, because they could (wrongly IMO) be treated like the Wordpress hosting provider. So I do agree MS should see clear of this to minimise such risks.
Hence it makes sense to focus on storage of private data and for MS to not push this in directions that will trigger regulators.
of course in the current internet it resolves to an IP … in SAFE it would resolve an XOR-Address of Content
…and i think in an implementation in a past testnet the XOR-Address of the Content just was hash(service_name + chosen_name) … so no rocket science or super hard to implement … imho it can and should be a third party solution … (+ if the DNS System is not exchangable and a centralized solution conceptuated by maidsafe i expect there is 0 chance squatting won’t be a problem)
…the currently existing centralised DNS structure was the reason i found this project in the first place … i couldn’t understand why i can’t just choose send@message.riddim … or myhomepage.riddim … and was looking for an alternative where i could freely choose instead of paying some random dudes for a name they (why precisely (?)) somehow can charge money for … with added artificial scarcity …
Yes, a DNS provider holds the names to all sites and convert site names to their coresponding IP-address. When a user wants to connect to a site, the user sends a name request to the DNS service provider which connects to the IP of the requested site.
I anticipate that post launch and SNT is tradable at a good price, some anonymous person(s) will appear who will fund development of various things that Maidsafe and the foundation need to stay clear of.
DNS and browser (and safe-git safe-site) should be an easy one for third party to get going.
An interesting thread on this forum would be just that. How, given the simple data types we have, can this be done.
We have CRDT registers where the owners key is the name of the register
We have chunks where Hash(content)) == name
It would be great to allow folks to throw out possible designs without changing these types as a SHOULD NOT pragma. So anything that changes these types should be another thread.
the remaining question is how i can share my address book / how i can find the address books of my pals …
ps: …well and since this might spam the network with many small entries (possibly linking “the safenet” completely once per user…) … maybe linking to other addressbooks might be less excessive (?) … but then again the full list of my contacts would be visible to others … not sure this is desirable …
Yes, this would indeed work AFAIK. It feels like a sort of web of trust DNS. Pretty neat IMO.
Yes, this is an open question for sure. There is a way with BLS where we could create many to 1 multisig, i.e. say 1 of 1000. So you have 1000 contacts and give them all a key. They can all see each other but they are not public.
I am sure there are other options, but this is pretty neat and a neat app
the register address is the public key corresponding to the private key that allows access to it - right?
so in the current setup there is no way of deterministricly getting an address in xor space (?) (unlike it was with mutable data - correct?)
are all entries stored spread across the network or are they stored “in the register”? is there a description of current data types and all their (and their key/value) properies?
It should be remembered that the Internet in its current form was created in accordance with the interests of the decision makers, so SN will be a “thorn in their flesh” because it is a game changer and not only creates a new network protocol, but more importantly will be an autonomous network that no policy or regulation can stop.
And while I too would like to see the creation of something that works like DNS and directory structure, I fully agree that at this point the creation of anything outside the protocol layer by (or in any connection with) MaidSafe is a risk.
Regulators can always adjust the law, and MS and the Foundation need to be prepared for that, so the maximum focus should be on the operation of the network, because in my opinion there is still a long way to go.
