In my opinion, Safe will be a necessary step if we want to recover and maintain the ability to freely express , debate, inform and research diverging opinions about technology and progress in the not so far future.
The current internet and the main media are slowly but surely turning into the vector of a single ideology . The diverging voices are being either shut down or buried deep in the search rankings. We see browser tools and filters appear to "educate" and warn about "false" sources of information, that stigmatize websites and authors for not respecting the mainstream thinking. Just like the spanish inquisition created the Index and decided what book could be read or not.
I would not be surprised to find websites that promote Sepp Holzer in the "bad"category one of the days...
Last year we had some discussions here about should we have autonomous robots wander around and let them have money , rights as persons, vote, etc etc... I expressed concerns on the concequences of these projects, and found very epidermic reactions from people who expressed a deeply rooted faith in the fact that technology can not fail.
My point was , and still is, that while today such a discussion is possible, the way the current internet is headed will hinder the debate and soon or later make it either impossible or repressible. Not only about technology but about any subject that would diverge from the main, official way of thinking.
In this sense, Safe comes as a immense hope, as it will allow anyone to freely , and if needed, anonymously, express diverging opinions, without a possibility to be either censored or jailed.
It will then be our responsability to use it to educate and promote wisely thought ideas, so that we can have hopes for a bright future.
I strongly agree with the idea of
appropriate technology, btw