Yes, there might be a few places where anonymous transactions work…
Thats all. It still isn’'t usually going to allow you to be competitive. And in an online world, anything physical cannot be anonymous.
This arguement is dumb and irrelevant as far as I am concerned. A waste of time. To do business effectively you gather as many facts as possible. Period, end of story. If anonymous transactions make you competitive. Do it. That will happen insanely rarely though. Vending machines are not ignorant by design, they are ignorant because that is their nature… If they could easily identify you they would.
The main point is the OP has no point. It is incoherent, repetitive, trolling nonsense.
Bad PR - was discussed and mentioned in dozens of topics.
“Illegal” - completely nonsensical term. What’s is illegal for you may be legal for me. Why should I even consider - let alone agree - anyone’s demands to restrict my use of the network? Oh, wait, don’t answer because we already discussed this in 10+ topics with over 1,000 posts.
Censorship - this OP is rude enough to call for censorship on this network which has the primary purpose to enable censorship-free access to everyone. But wait, isn’t this the 5th topic on censorship this month?
And last but not least the OP-er contributed absolutely nothing to this quasi-discussion. Look at his posts on this topic, they’re laughable! He made two comments suggesting a “moderated” home page. That, after calling for network-censorship.
I can only conclude the biggest fools are those who keep commenting and wasting their time on this. Muting this topic now…
It clearly isn’t any of those things as anybody scrolling back can clearly see. [quote=“janitor, post:103, topic:4020”]
Bad PR - was discussed and mentioned in dozens of topics.
[/quote]
And…what is your point? [quote=“janitor, post:103, topic:4020”]
2) “Illegal” - completely nonsensical term. What’s is illegal for you may be legal for me.
[/quote]
Again, what is your point? Nobody was talking about restricting anybody’s use of the Network.[quote=“janitor, post:103, topic:4020”]
3) Censorship - this OP is rude enough to call for censorship on this network
[/quote]
Rude? WTF you on about - have you heard how rude you are being?[quote=“janitor, post:103, topic:4020”]
And last but not least the OP-er contributed absolutely nothing to this quasi-discussion.
[/quote]
Whereas yo have made your usual insightful and useful comments…lol[quote=“janitor, post:103, topic:4020”]
Muting this topic now…
[/quote]
Aaaaaand…there it is again, the usual derisory hit and run.[quote=“janitor, post:103, topic:4020”]
It is incoherent, repetitive, trolling nonsense.
[/quote]
It seems to me all search data could be maintained locally. An app could store a users data on their local machine or in their private SAFE files.
The would allow the engine to reference what that user has searched, purchased, etc. without having that data go anywhere outside of their search sandbox. This would allow both accurate search metrics and privacy. If i buy something from a site like amazon, my purchase info would be stored on MY machine or safe private files for MY reference and use, not for the corporation to track, sell to third parties and spam me with. Seems like this would be a possible solution to this argument.
To take it another step, a user, if they so choose, could opt in to sending their data to the company/search engine/etc…but for me that seems like a needless leak of info…
But doesn’t amazon have the right to know what they sold and to whom? Ought not they know what offers they made to you and to other customers and weather those prices moved product or not?
How are you going to force them to forget something that they obviously and unavoidably should know?
Everyone wants companies to be stupid. They pretend like wishful thinking would make them so. But that whole line. of thinking is rediculous. You cannot ban knowledge. Facts are facts. All parties to said facts will know what they know.
SAFE will make the retention of knowledge even easier. It is censorship proof and immutable.
Short answer? No they don’t. It’s my information to do with what I will not theirs.
If they never know that information in the first place how can they forget it? Why should they be allowed that information in the first place? Again it’s my info not theirs. It’s my perogative whether to share my information or not.
No we don’t wish companies to be stupid, we wish companies to mind their own business and not spy on us or try and mine our data without our consent. There’s a difference. If you want information about someone you ASK FIRST. You don’t just go ahead and take their information and you certainly don’t share what information has been shared with you with third parties without explicit consent.
True which means all the more reason for people to keep their information private and not give it willy nilly to every company hither and yon.
If you do a PUT request. You are asking a server for services. That Fact is known to the server and it is inherently known by the server. Nobody “owns” facts except for the people that know them. Nobody who is a party to a transaction is not entitled to know how their interaction went, and by nature they do.
In SAFE that may not be the case. But that will be a detriment, not a asset to adoption. Because I am a vendor, and I have choice of building websites that provide me feedback as far as how well they are performing and websites that don’t, I am not going to be in any hurry to cripple myself. I will store data that I choose not to have hacked in SAFE, but I will not embrace it as a place to do commerce.
Some customers may prefer privacy, but if there is nothing for them to buy, their point is pointless. SAFE will be used for commerce where anonymity is important. But that is usually limited to the black market. It isn’t a very good business practice anywhere else.
Unless of course new businesses spring up that embrace privacy, adapt to SAFE, and don’t adhere to your philosophy of entitlement and thereby create competition for you.
There are no servers on SAFE. You should know this by now. But yes you send a PUT request and you’re asking to upload data. But the network doesn’t know, nor care, what that data is nor does it keep track of who makes these requests. It just uploads the data to your account and burns your safecoin accordingly. That’s it. To carry the metaphor forward the vendor would know they had traded x product for y amount of currency but they wouldn’t know with whom, when, for what reason or any of that kind of personal information unless it was critical to the sale.
The network effect might result in it becoming a “universal bucket” for people, and businesses, to backup their data to, but, unlike Dropbox and its sigint-infested ilk, with the privacy baked in.
