My 2 cents regarding the main message SAFE is sending to the public.
Currently the message is far too technical for most regular people to understand.
To regular folk words like ‘Decentralised’ are confusing and the effect is you lose them.
Taken from the maidsafe.net front page: “Privacy. Security. Freedom. The Decentralized Internet Is Here”
And from the same page lower down “The New Decentralized Internet”.
So what am I babbling about? Well firstly these two statements are confusing. Is it the decentralized internet or the new decentralized internet? It may sound like nothing, but small inconsistencies like this make a big difference and secondly when marketing and branding yourself to the wider public you want something simnple and understandable. Something a five year old should understand.
I would go with the main branding message as: The New Internet
Get rid of the word ‘decentralized’ completely.
And as a sub-message (I dont have one yet) it should focus on things like 'Hacker-Proof" - “NSA & Government Spying Proof” etc.
Err, the main way people are going to use safenet will more than likely be as a pre-installed dependency for their favourite app that sends a fraction of the earned safecoin to the developer to cover storage costs, so I don’t see the need to market safenet directly to customers at all.
I like the suggestion. “The New Internet” does draw in the mainstream audience more than “The Decentralized Internet” and “The New Decentralized Internet”.
Instead of “Privacy. Security. Freedom. The Decentralized Internet Is Here”, it could read:
“Privacy. Security. Freedom. Decentralized. The New Internet Is Here.”
I agree that the difference is significant from a branding perspective. It reaches out to both customers, non-customers, techies, and non-techies.
Hmm… That’s a good point. People in general maybe don’t have a clue what “decentralized” means when it comes to networks. Heck, many people probably don’t know what “network” means. I heard people being interviewed and questioned about what the internet is. Some answers were in line with: “I don’t know. I just click on the e-logo on my computer.”
For people who are developers, that might sound outrageous, but that’s just because when we are familiar with a subject then we take it for granted. For example, how many people know what DNA methylation is? Or what port fuel injection is?
We are refining our messaging and the website itself at the moment. It is tricky to get a message that appeals to all, I’ve also found people expressing confusion about what a new Internet is, as @Anders points out, many don’t know what the existing Internet is. I do think that once a feature complete network is launched our task here becomes significantly easier.
The “internet” is going to be a rather massive incumbent to overcome. You are better off to sell the security features, and as more and more apps switch to SAFE, the internet will switch to SAFE too.
If you look for something that people can relate to, what they believe they understand and where even hipsters feel the need to jump upon you’d probably use Web 3.0
No clue whether that is good or bad one, but it certainly qorks for many mainstream users.
In the beginning yes. But believe me, then it will be a mesh network. And it will be YUGE. It will be so great your head will spin. That I can tell you. :Donald Trump voice:
If people don’t know what “decentralized” means they can look it up on wikipedia, or simply ask a question or two. Seriously I fail to see why we should be catering to people with the intelligence of tissue paper. This very topic highlights the very reason why I find most human beings too stupid to interact with and not worth my consideration. In short why bother marketing to an audience that doesn’t have the intelligence to look up basic terminology. It’s not like “decentralized” isn’t part of standard English or some kind of fancy techno lingo.
In addition to this the fact maidsafe is decentralized is an important feature and not one to be downplayed or overlooked for the sake of catering to the masses. It’s by design, not a bug and many people are looking for that kind of thing. A lot of people are explicitly LOOKING for decentralization, freedom, security and privacy. If you want to drive a new technology you don’t cater to the mainstream you cater to the edges. You cater to the innovators, the early adopters, the early investors and the fans, and others who will help you reach that critical 10 to 14% that will shift public opinion of what is normal.
There is a distinction between branding for the general public (e.g. image) versus focusing on the target audience.
Slogans like “Private. Secure. Freedom. Decentralized. The New Internet” are themes that we want the public to absorb unlike bitcoin’s public image that’s hard to turn around. Bitcoin’s initial public image could have read “Bitcoin: Anonymous. Money laundering. Drugs. The Unseen Transaction” for a lot of folks. Even today, the negative image of bitcoin is hard to shrug off. Banks who are beginning to embrace the blockchain often make statements like “We only care about the blockchain, not bitcoin.” To say bitcoin has an image problem is an understatement.
In contrast, the target audience would be those already interested in crypto-currencies, liberty, decentralization, peer-to-peer, etc. who read articles on websites like Coindesk, Cointelegraph, etc. as well as financial institutions and hedge funds who understand the implications of SAFE, bitcoin, blockchain technology, etc. These are folks who will want to use the SAFE network right now with the masses following suit years later.
To say bitcoin has an image problem is an understatement
Haha, that is completely ridiculous.
Image problem. Like if gold had an image problem. Surely people who stacked a few bars would take them out on the street and start handing them out to passers by.
The Unseen Transaction
What unseen transaction? SAFE has unseen transactions, not Bitcoin.
I agree that people don’t care about decentralization.
It was important for Bitcoin – because all the previous alternate currencies got sued or raided.
But that is hardly a sales pitch for the public – They don’t expect their banks to get raided, they don’t expect their ISP to be raided… And even if it is, they don’t expect it to effect them.
The sales pitch for decentralization has to be aimed at oppressive governments… – the great firewall etc… People wouldn’t mind that being destroyed and circumvented.
@janitor Your reply proves the point. Branding (public image) versus target audience. Most, if not all, participants on this forum would fall in the target audience group – i.e. those who are informed and knowledgeable of digital currencies. The folks who fall in the public image group are easy to find. Just mention bitcoin to acquaintances and ask for their first impressions. Many (not all) would say scam or for criminals – things of that nature. That’s from my personal experience.
Even “financial/economic experts” like Paul Krugman get bitcoin wrong. Anyone can read his articles on the subject. Imagine asking him what he thinks about SAFE.
I’ve been telling people the SAFE Network is Internet 2.0 and SAFE Coin is Bitcoin 2.0.
I know the SAFE Network and SAFE Coin are so much more than that but my hopes are it will spur interest enough to get people investigating it themselves.
If SAFE Network be censorship free, guess what kind of “image” it will have 5 days after the launch when first sensational examples of its use make it to the nannyst/statist press?
And unlike Bitcoin, if the design proves to be snoop-proof as expected:
noone will ever get caught
all the “terrible” content will remain online as long as SAFE stays
My answer to the press coverage of such content on SAFE will be: Fxxx OFF.
What’s yours going to be?
What people? There are many people and groups that care about decentralization, even those that may not be tech savvy. Decentralization is more of a cultural thing so I’d put forward it depends on who you talk to. First Nations care about decentralization. Anyone who has or does live in a rural area usually cares about decentralization. For those with intermittent power or resource issues who have issues depending on centralized resources, they definitely care about decentralization. There are many people who care about decentralization. The question is relating the concept to their data because A) A lot of people do not understand how the current internet works. And B) How maidsafe works to change all that.
Yeah that’s until people start whining about “terrorists”, “pedophiles” and “offensive content”. Then they’re all too happy to have oppressive government censor them and spy on them. “Oh give me free speech except when someone disagrees with me or posts something I don’t like.”
Yeah pretty much. Just more scare tactics and propaganda to get people to give up their freedoms.
I think it’s just a matter of time. We don’t need everyone to switch to SAFE right from the get-go… as more and more Internet users see and experience the faults of the server-based Internet, the more and more SAFE will be talked about.
The initial user base beyond this community will most likely be people actively looking for more private and secure solutions to data storage… probably a lot of the same people that currently use Tor.
I frequently pitch SAFE as an alternate Internet that is replacing dependence on servers with a peer-to-peer network of nodes owned by users which seems to resonate with average people pretty well.
