I often end up talking to people with low technical experties or who think they know computers but really don’t know anything about the cryptosphere and ultimately end up having the same arguments with them over and over.
The government can hack everything because it has super computers.
The government wouldn’t let an autonomous decentralized internet happen (but they are).
I’ll be dead before it happens.
Electronic money is inherently unsafe.
What’s the difference between crypto and my debit card? Why is this safecoin thing better? (In essence what’s the difference between crypto and fiat?)
Isn’t this what the government wants? Won’t this kill cash?
I barely know how to use facebook and play pong on my computer how can I use this SAFE net thing?
OMG drug dealers. OMG pedophiles! OMG terrorists!
Bitcoin will save us. Bitcoin will crash. Why do we need/should trust a new decentralized internet?
What is bitcoin? What is cryptocurrency? All I know about is cash money.
What do you mean the government can’t shut down the website? And what’s a “server”?
Etc etc etc. Please tell me we have or can make a FAQ, preferable a printable one, to give to people so I don’t have to keep repeating myself and running the gauntlet with the ignorant.
The positives outweigh the negatives; there’s less point dwelling on the negatives. Trying to answer FUD or trolls, is like trying to prove a negative at times - it’s not worth going beyond a simple pointer that allows those who are sincere to think for themselves.
Privacy; security; freedom, are each and together most important, other considerations are secondary… and even those who action those secondary interests, know that. Just have to start pointing out the bleeding obvious like Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and beyond.
The current internet is not private or secure… for individuals or perhaps more importantly for businesses… look at the leaks over the past years - problems that should not occur, are too easy to action and too frequent. SAFE provides opportunity to resolve key problems with the internet as it is… but SAFE is the network, what becomes built on top of it is to wonder at. It’s like the 1994 internet… people afraid of the unknown, aren’t going to engage well with the answers talking about the eventual whole not going wrong, for all the best intentions of heading off their unthunk thoughts. It’s an easier thought for them to consider what will go right.
Make a list then of the answers SAFE might provide to existing fundamental problems and worry less about what other people might expect could go wrong.
You seem to be missing the point. The people who are asking these questions ARE thinking for themselves and are not trolls. They are honestly just that ignorant. Many do not even know how to use a computer or the more complex aspects of the internet let alone are able to grasp HOW the current internet works so that to propose a new system of how the internet could work or to point out security issues with the current internet is entirely beyond them. This level of ignorance doesn’t make them trolls, insincere or stupid, it just means they lack knowledge. Hence why I proposed the creation of a FAQ, especially one that could be PRINTED out and handed out, in person, to such individuals.
No one is arguing the value of privacy, security and freedom. In fact many such individuals would probably agree. But you can’t propose a solution unless you can accurately explain the current situation and describe the problem. Moreover the SAFE network is in and of itself a rather revolutionary concept to grasp anyway and would require even more explanation.
I’m not missing the point … a FAQ is fine… a “FUD rebuttal”, is fodder with which to feed the troll.
Ignorance is not the same as FUD, which is obviously “fear; uncertainty; and doubt”, as a tool to cause trouble used by those with alt agenda, rather than the genuinely curious and ignorant.
Positively framed FAQs are obviously a good idea… but be on the front foot.
No one is arguing the current internet is not secure or that SAFE is not needed. The problem is if you think the internet and computers are magic and don’t understand how they work then explaining how SAFE would solve this privacy issue becomes problematic. The reaction I keep getting is “So you make a new internet to replace the old internet? Well the government will just hack that one too so it fixes nothing. The government is invincible.” Unless you can explain WHY one internet is vunerable but the other internet isn’t then proposing opting for one over the other solves nothing.
But you’re assuming they’re afraid of the unknown and just not ignorant. Many people, especially older people, are simply cautious, especially with their money, because they are used to things going all to hell. Businesses fail, plans don’t turn out, shit hits the fan in one way or another. And pile ignorance of tech on top of it and it just becomes more complicated. But that doesn’t equate to a fear of the unknown. It just means you want to know as much as you can about a potential investment, which actually makes SENSE. Which is why good documentation and explainations to break things down are important.
So call it whatever you want. The SAFE FAQ for Dummies or Maidsafe: Keeping it Simple. Whatever works. All I’m saying is we need something to help field all these routine questions by the horrendously ignorant.