A litmus test for the success of SAFE


#21

Yes exactly have to take the money out of the election process because its amounts to a censor or pre filtering that corrupts all, it means no candidate who isn’t compromised or puppetized can even run. As for SI, I think its AGI that makes SI possible but then it develops itself on an exponentially accelerating time curve and gets away from us- Bostrom’s concerns.


#22

The litmus for me will be when the software itself is in Safe-git and the network itself has a means to vote on changes to the code.

After that (and assuming nothing better comes along - a long shot) it’s all a matter of time - whether it’s ten years or fifty, success will be inevitable.


#23

This of course assumes that we can survive an economic crash and don’t all go back to horses and buggies by then.


#24

Hopefully early versions will help with that. One thing that defeats the corrupting influnce of money and money culture is better and better approximations of truth disseminating to wider and wider audiences. Widespread education empowers ordinary people and prevents tyrrany.


#25

I echo that!!! - push the use cases - the legal use cases and the network’s utility will be seen in all good areas.


#26

Inteligent or more aware people are very aware of the privacy and data security issue and will themselves with their infuential preference drive the shift. But make no mistake, the serverless aspect of SAFE and the greater stability is the killer application itself. Also there is no sense in which we need another supply side top down sell- out money megaphone network. Moving away from a system of megaohone loud speakers dedicaded to pandering, propaganda and drowing out censorship spin and spying- moving away from that which is the primary driver of useless money first society is clearly the way forward. SAFE does that.