There was a part in a recent interview where David Irvine was putting forth the value proposition of SAFE vs the current internet, I am pretty sure it was the new tech crunch interview and to a lessor extent in another new interview. It was shocking because I’d never heard the utility stated so plainly on the forum. It was in plain English but in essence it might be like applying Beckstrom’s law to the clear net and then to a SAFE replacement (given the alpha we can speculate) and the difference is inevitability. Current net is broke beyond repair, apparently this was always the case but it wasn’t so obvious in the early days, but it will be glaring against the example of SAFE. Its kind of hard to explain to people how something that so changed their lives is based on bad engineering logic- until they see the concrete counter example.
But I can see from this article now that post Alpha its like some sort of distortion field is being lifted and its suddenly easier to talk about it. One woman in the comments said “the release of SAFE network will be Earth shaking.”
Its easy to think about Beckstrom’s law (as in wiki) think of your favorite pizza place with delivery service and without. Delivery service is like the value of the network. You might still drive over or you might go elsewhere if no delivery. So Clearnet might be like your favorite pizza place without delivery service. And the difference in SAFE’s favor might be akin to truly reliable free instant delivery anywhere with a discount on the actual pizza. A true cord cutter, and its not just cutting the cord on needless cost but on points of failure and points of coercion. You don’t risk a flat or an accident or getting caught in traffic or engine trouble or holding up the party or spilling a drink while driving or a DUI or getting car jacked…