Although a few people are concerned about their privacy/security online this isn't a widespread feeling

I’m surprised no one else has said it, but I don’t think this statement is necessarily accurate.

Privacy and security are at the heart of how and why this technology is being developed, and so those who are passionate about it are, of course, the ones to get involved at such an early stage. And it IS and early stage. Fan site? Sure.

But the point is, that freedom is popular. People do the stupid stuff they do with facebook, google, etc., because they are free to make connections and do neat stuff. Privacy and security tend to take a back seat to freedom. But people do care about privacy and security, even if not so much.

My point is that people don’t have to have privacy as their first concern to get involved with the SAFE Network when it is up and running. It’ll be liberating in a number of ways. It will allow people to exercise freedom in many ways they hadn’t thought of, WITH privacy.

It will allow them to run software on their spare computer resources and make, at least, spare change.

Those who frequent this site are those who see the bigger vision that is possible. Is it a certainty? No.

Do we know how it’s actually going to play out in detail? Of course not.

Are those here more concerned about privacy and security than the majority of the population? Absolutely.

Will everyone who finds the network attractive, after it is up and actually working, have privacy as a high motivation above functionality? Not everyone, I think, but a lot. (Look at the millions of users of Tor.)

Will use and improved functionality combined with lack of mass snooping, lack of identity theft, cutting out the excess middle men in general, lack of censorship, the unkillability of the network once it gets running, etc., etc., start to snowball into a rush to privacy, security AND freedom that the network is hoped to provide? Most here think it likely, I think. I certainly see that potential myself and that’s why I’m involved.

So, no, privacy doesn’t have to drive mass adoption of itself. That’s part of the problem with the privacy solutions available today: They come at too high a price in terms of the freedom to act, and people think justifiably that it’s not effective to try. I’m enthusiastic because not only do I value privacy and security, as well as freedom, but I want all three as the default for everyone who wishes to take them.

If the technology functions to a decent percentage of what is planned, there are more than enough to make it happen, I’m sure. Snowballs start slowly and later get big and fast.

Welcome to the small snowball at the edge of a steep slope.

See you at the bottom.


I thought it was 326%

86.765% of “percentages” on the internet are BS.
My BS is more accurate than yours.


Without regard for the security/privacy, if Safecoin delivers an anonymous, predictably inflationary, global, currency, there will be no problem with adoption.


Privacy for private citizens isn´t the only selling argument for the Safe network. Companies and governments will benefit from a network that is difficult to break or leak from.

This will hopefully not be possible with the Safe network in operation:
Entire US voter registration record leaks (191 million)


Let me clarify some misconceptions.

  1. Desire for celebritization does not mean one doesn’t want privacy. If anything they need strong privacy for tight PR management.

  2. Socializing via the internet doesn’t equate to people wanting their info on the market. People don’t want their information floating about without their explicit consent. With greater awareness of this tragedy, more would voice their opinion on the matter. Right now, most people don’t understand the implications. Their current indoctrination prevents them from envisioning a world where they have complete control of their data. These statistics are flawed in that the participants of the analysis aren’t given the complete picture prior to their submissions. Also, consider that it’s fairly difficult to find a Facebook account that isn’t set to “private - friends only”. That alone gives you some idea of the general desire for privacy.

  3. SAFE and other anonymous platforms fill a large gap in our social infrastructure. These tools allow for free expression without the fear of persecution. Enabling greater diversity and new previously hindered perspectives on life. This has many far reaching benefits.

Nat, your questions are perfectly valid and your statements about statistics are understandably warped. Tis the result of gathering biased data. Not entirely your fault.:wink: <= damn emoji’s!!

1 Like

EDIT: Beaten by @Tonda, who has said it better. Meant to be a reply to the OP, not Aster, I hit the wrong link :frowning:

And I find not all facebook users lack concern for their privacy. Even Facebook pretends to improve their privacy because of the concerns. How many facebook accounts have completely fake information because the person needs it to see some project’s FB page.

I have found that a certain number of people desire privacy & security, but in order to function in their circle of friends, they have given up some of that privacy. Given the opportunity they would jump at he chance to have their privacy and function in the circle of their friends.

So I see the statistics as disjoint. Just because 54% want to be a ‘celebrity’ does not mean 54% are not concerned about their privacy. Just because 83% of adults have a social media account, does not mean 83% give real info, or 83% are disinterested in privacy.