It’s okay Chris. I’m starting to think of @luckybit as a sea anchor to windward that keeps our prow to the wind and cutting the rough seas, rather than getting them broadside. 
2 Likes
I’m a land lubber… you seem to be describing some kind of ancient rite from the oceans 
3 Likes
He just needs a good slap with a kipper.
like this …
2 Likes
@happybeing gets it. He lives on a boat!
3 Likes
It will be cool like Mathematica was cool when it came out. Many people will have to have it, no question. If it doesn’t light the world afire its children will. And seeing as its such a pure entity even the most tainted of its children will carry greatness!
The SAFE network will be (in some sense) the worlds biggest supercomputer, that’s not a bad place to start I think.
For the capitalists amongst us then the fact that the value of safecoin is also not arbitrarily related to greed and fear is interesting - each one genuinely represents a proportion of the supercomputer, kind of like shares in a company (at least in my mind). Of course speculation and utility will play a huge role but thats not a bad thing. O yeah, in terms of features Safecoin is unrivalled as a crypto currency / value transfer mechanism.
I don’t doubt that pretty quickly all the worlds media will be accessible for free, without pop ups or takedown notices and no-one will come knocking at your dour for streaming the wrong thing. That’s not too shabby either.
Umm, what else: Your data will be stored forever.; no DOS attacks; your online friendships won’t be owned by a profit making company, your government can’t spy on you (in fact it will ultimately be what governments use IMO to store data on - the inherent structure is naturally far superior); the worlds data will be de duplicated (that’s eco friendly I guess); anyone can make a hugely successful app without pretty much any overheads (huge deal I reckon); the Internet of things is a match made in heaven; robots will share a ‘brain’; and it will solve world hunger and bring about world peace… Ok maybe that last one was a stretch but there’s just SO many positives the list goes on, and on, and on, and on…
2 Likes
I’m optimistic over the long term (20 year timespan) if the technology can remain state of the art for that long. I’m pessimistic over the short term (5 year timespan). And I’m concerned about the society of the present, because that is what represents the people and personalities we currently are dealing with.
Over time privacy will either become more important to people or we’ll have total transparency with no privacy at all. SAFE Network as it exists right now will not be enough to make masses of people care about privacy. It has to somehow be marketed to people and we should not expect people to be rational decision makers because they aren’t.
People seem to think that because I don’t know what to expect from the future that somehow I don’t want the best possible future?
It’s more that I admit that we cannot know how other people will react to a new technology. My opinion is in the long term future something like SAFE Network is probably going to be critical but in the short to mid term the attitudes people have and the way society is structured would have to completely be altered for something like SAFE Network to catch on. I’m glad something like SAFE Network is being built but I don’t know if that is enough to attract people to it.
If SAFE Network can get some high profile wins early, catch momentum, and stay on the cutting edge technologically, then after 10 years we might see it begin to really catch on. We really only have perhaps 10 years before privacy becomes so scarce that it might not exist so it really depends on how people react to what is happening around them.
A recent article has been making rounds around the Internet about brain to brain communication, or a brain internet. As technology like this becomes more practical then something like SAFE Network if it is still state of the art might be critical for neuro privacy.
Privacy will have to exist in the ideal “hive mind” context. Not enough discussion is on privacy in that context and right now people seem to think it’s just science fiction. 5 or 10 years from now it will not be science fiction anymore and at that point people will either have to take privacy seriously or creating an Internet of brains with no neuro-privacy.
My suggestion for marketing would be to discuss the long term importance of SAFE Network, and of privacy, in ways people might be concerned about 10 or 20 years from now. People might not be worried about whether their thoughts are private in 2015 but in 2025 the conversation will be different. SAFE Network has to be ahead of the conversation on privacy so that when people mention breakthroughs like brain to brain communication someone mentions SAFE Network and asks the questions about privacy.
Stealing from something I head Cody Wilson say – The open source movement is anti-capital, not anti-capitalist…
It isn’t that capitalism is bad in and of itself, it is that it is too expensive for the everyday man to play… The open source movement and the SAFE network will massively reduce the amount of capital that is needed to become a capitalist entrepreneur… Basically EVERYONE will have access to the computing power of a massive distributed secure datacenter for the cost of a few gigs of unused hard drive space.
So like @luckybit suggests, Yah, it may be in large part an Dropbox or an Amazon Web Services, or a Google compute platform – but without the paid middleman, and without the centralization, and without the continuous need for revenue to keep the shareholders happy… Freely accessible without having to pull out the credit card and pay for permission.
3 Likes
Not too long ago I read an article about research showing that many people do care about privacy, but they suffer from major defeatism. Because they believe they stand no chance keeping their information private on the internet, they stop trying and try not to care too much. I’m looking for this research right now, I’ll post it here if I find it.
Anyway, even if we “only” get a million people (0.014% of the world) that would already be quite something. Certainly more users than Bitcoin. Personally I have good hopes that at least 5% of the internet users will care enough to use SAFE. That’d be 150 million people.
3 Likes
I think you have to make people care about it and right now most people don’t seem to care. Not only do most people not care about privacy but they don’t even care to own their own data online. So how are we supposed to convince the Facebook generation of digital natives to care about something they never had?
You have to sell SAFE Network to future generations. To the people who will have to adapt to a future of cyborgs, of brain to computer or brain to brain communication, to surveillance everywhere, in that context privacy might be easier to sell.
People don’t care if corporations own their life unless you extrapolate 5 or 10 years down the line what it means. It means extrapolating 20 years down the line and showing what that could mean, if the current path is continued. If people see what is ahead and still choose not to have privacy then they made a choice but at the same time it’s not fair to blame people who can’t see ahead to know what they might be losing.
If you really think more people value privacy then why aren’t the other privacy apps more popular and why is Facebook the anti-privacy social network the most popular? Facebook doesn’t even pay people for the data it gathers.
2 Likes
There will be privacy exploiting applications on SAFE too.
If you think this will be reality in a few decades, forget about it. The brain doesn’t have a direct interface. The interfaces of the brain are the mouth, eyes, nose, etc. What these scientists do is equivalent to analysing the electromagnetic field of a running CPU without knowing it’s instruction set nor the firm- or software and trying to make sense of what it does. They spot some high level correlations (such as movement of a limb), that’s all.
Our scientific knowledge of the workings of the brain is greatly exaggerated and overestimated by the public. The brain works fundamentally different from our computers and is the most complex thing known to mankind. And again, it doesn’t have a direct interface.
1 Like
I hope you didn’t take my analogy as negative. I was acknowledging that you’re keeping us alert to possible problems. Makes us all look and consider and respond. Sometimes getting all the details sorted out can be rough going, but that’s just how it goes. Your input is not unwelcome and I don’t doubt your laudable intentions.
1 Like
My wife who uses the internet/computers, but has zero interest in how it works. She does not understand any of the technical aspects of SAFE, but she has been listening to me go on and on for over a year about this disruptive tech. I asked her what she thought was important about the SAFE network and what should I focus on when talking to non-tech folks?
She says it seems like the SAFE network is for the world and not just an American thing. I have a list of things I think are important about our SAFE future, but the more I think about her statement it is pretty powerful. Particularly since we are American.
1 Like
@luckybit I really think you should listen to the most recent podcast from the crossroads before you keep going on about “masses of people.”
https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/safe-crossroads-podcast-7-a-different-perspective
People DO care about privacy and given how many people are obsessed with cell phones and how many people are suffering from poverty I think SAFE will appeal to a great many of the unwashed masses.
2 Likes
As someone who has actually had telepathic connections before I’d have to disagree with you there Seneca. Also you’re not taking into account the electromagnetic fields we emit from our heart and brain, which are quite wide and can interact with the other EM fields, most notably those generated by other human beings.
To break it down for you. When you change what you feel and think that changes your EM field, not to mention yourself, which influences what information you are sending to world around you. Electronic devices also have EM fields. It’s not a huge leap to link developing one’s ability to send a mental or emotional signal via eletromagnetic wavelength that can be picked up by another biological life form and instead design a device that can interpret that same signal similar to how we have devices that recognize voice commands, motion sensors, facial recognition or even recognize input from a keyboard.
Have you considered the Million Dollar Challenge
Didn’t even know it existed but considering I can’t just randomly establish a connection with Joe Blow and it’s rare I find someone who is psychically gifted enough to establish a connection with and who I can establish a deep enough level with trust with I doubt this kind of competition would work. It’s not like calling someone up on the phone you know, just dial a number, ring ring. It’s more like when an app asks for privacy access only it’s “Do you want to give this person complete access to your soul?” And then as bad things happen you slowly decrease the privacy level and consequently the connection gets fuzzier and fuzzier. Or conversely as good things happen you get closer and the connection gets stronger and stronger. I was literally getting sick at the same time as my girlfriend there and vice versa, waking up in sync (in different geographic areas), for me for some damned reason her moods affected what was playing on the radio though don’t ask me how. But we’re talking THAT level of intimacy protracted over months and years. It’s not parlor games you can do on a day time talk show. If you were to “replicate” the “experiment” I’d say step one would be to develop a guenuine deep level of trust with the person you wished to become telepathic with. For me my various psychic experiences weren’t something I didn’t consciously, or at best weren’t something I could do very well conscously. I think under ideal conditions and with practice I could send and receive simple telepathic messages, but you get those more like emotions or images or concepts not specific words. Other experiences were completely random, and while the patterns held true it was completely out of my control as to when it would occur.
So applying for some contest would be out of the question because to do so would require conscious control and an ability to perform on command in a controlled environment. And expecting to develop telepathy in a controlled environment kind of is a bit of an odd expectation. I mean most people wouldn’t let a random stranger see them naked and tell them all their secrets. So why the expectation of random telepathy?
I mean gee I’d love to have that kind of control but I’m just not there yet.
But that’s one of the misconceptions about telepathy, that’s like instant messaging or the phone. It’s more like… digging a tunnel into someone else’s soul with lots and lots of doors in between and if you do it right you have a two way pathway in between. Now imagine if people started actually doing that. And now image if people started doing that with their computers. Wouldn’t you want the correct privacy protocols in place?
Governments have certainly looked into this kind of thing :
Remote viewing (RV) is a fancy name for telepathy or clairvoyance, the alleged psychic ability to perceive places, persons, and actions that are not within the range of the senses.
The CIA and the U.S. Army thought enough of remote viewing to spend millions of taxpayers’ dollars on “Stargate.” The program involved using psychics for such operations as trying to locate Gaddafi of Libya (so our Air Force could drop bombs on him) and the locating of a missing airplane in Africa.
At one time as many as sixteen psychics worked for the government and the Defense Intelligence Agency made them available to other government departments.
So, it seems people DO care, but have not had an alternative that was easy to implement. SAFE may be that for them, given the apps that meet their needs.
I personally remember begrudgingly moving from LiveJournal (which had a tremendous amount of flexibility in who you shared things with, and a great amount of community-involved development at the time) to Facebook because the people I wanted to communicate with were on Facebook and not LiveJournal. The same might have happened when Google+ appeared, but as I tried to switch over to it, I found the same problem again: not enough of the people I wanted to communicate with were actively using G+.
Of course, the similarities of “moving” platforms don’t apply in the same way because SAFE isn’t primarily a communications platform - though will likely have some app for that in its early future.
I think making the transition smooth & easy will help with general-public adoption. I know I’ve considered an app that lets people “backup” their Google information into SAFE as a way to get it out of the silo. But having it backed up isn’t the same as putting it to use. Comparable apps (storing & sharing photos, contacts, etc.) will need to be in SAFE for people to migrate instead of just storing things in the network. But, even those storing things will have their start in using the network and be able to see what happens as it develops.