Is the SAFEbrowser and network anonymous?


#21

When you publish immutable data on the Safe network, even if no human sees or copies it, the nodes of the network do take note of it. I didn’t mean persons in my comparison, but nodes in the network.
You don’t have control on the other nodes, you don’t know who they are, where they are and where they go, just like people in the street. It is too late, you said what you said, and the network registered that moment. The best you can do is forget about it, or try to obfuscate it. The nodes will keep remembering what you said, and if you try to say " oh no I never said that", a group of nodes will gather and reach consensus, and say " yes you did, we as a group agree on that".


#22

Indeed, the idea and the code are here now, and, whoever delivers it first to the world, the question is not anymore “should we do it”, but “how do we react to it”.


#23

I just don’t understand the technology behind it yet. Nodes are just hard drives, right? I don’t see why I shouldn’t be able to erase something I put on a Safe drive in the “cloud”. That’s how come I asked about version control above. I guess I just need to read up on different data types.


#24

There are two types of data on the network, Mutable Data and Immutable Data. Mutable Data can be cleared, think of it as having a file on your harddrive where you can empty the content of the file, but the filename still stays. Immutable Data can not be deleted at all, but you can delete the “data map”, the keys required to read the data, making it inaccessible. There are some proposals for deletable data so there might be support for deletable data in the future, in addition to data that can’t be deleted.

The nodes themself doesn’t know which files or content they host because it’s encrypted and split into small chunks.


#25

Not exactly just disk drives, but organized, distributed,autonomous ones !

Welcome to the great club of those who try to understand Safe :slight_smile: It tales a while to get used to these new ideas, I myself think I only scratched the surface…

There is a very nice series of videos on youtube by the Safe Pod Montreal here : https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiYqQVdgdw_sSDkdIZzDRQR9xZlsukIxD

They take things from the very beginning and with layman words. Really good daily watching, does you much more good than the latest hollyvoid series :slight_smile:


#26

What were you doing in the Forest?


#27

Yes, and when and why? :wink:


#28

@Toivo, I am unsure what you were trying to say. At the moment I can create a website that holds very personal things, then ask one of the archive site to look at it and the archive site automatically crawls my site and records it. So now on the internet, if some authority forced me to take down my site I would. BUT the site (pages) are still on the internet accessible to everyone by linking to the archive site.

SAFE will not be much different except you can think of SAFE as that archive site where 404 errors are vanishingly small.


Now to my other consideration.

In amongst the billions upon billions of SAFEpages there is one with you private info/embarrassing info. Do people just come across it? Nope they have to be directed there. How? link in social media? Well links on social media sites and forums will be changeable on SAFE or else the site would not function much at all.

So then by getting that link removed the page essentially is not seen anymore.

This all has to do with audience. Any information put up on SAFE is invisible till someone places a link to it or shares the datamap. Even public data will essentially be invisible until someone highlights it or specifically searches for it in one of the search APPs that are sure to be built. If noone looks for it then again it will essentially be invisible and most likely you won’t even know it was there.

This is the thing about information, it has to be searched out or someone alert you to its existence.

If the link to the information is in a social media, forum, blog comment then it will be able to be changed since all those sites would of necessity need to be able to change links (that is they use muttable data for links etc). Even if they don’t that embarrassing info will be old news in 2 days.


#29

What’s the different with Onion Browser or ToR ?


#30

I was trying to say that someone could create a site like:
safe.embarassing.info

Now this site could become the most popular gossip site that is just known to exist. Then people could be rewarded for uploading content there. Maybe it would be flooded with stuff so that any one embarrassing act would drown there quickly, but anyway it would be a new kind of exposing site.

My point is just that within SAFEnet we can create economic incentive structures for all kinds of behaviours and the one creating them can also profit from them. So there is a motivation for creating all kinds of incentive structures. There are many kind of behaviours that can not be profited from nowadays as the chance of getting caught is too big, or it is deemed immoral.

I also think that the fact that something is possible with current technology is not really an counter argument to what I’m trying to say. Of course someone with strong motivation and enough skills can do all kinds of stuff. But what counts is how easy it is. It’s a bit like how Spotify made it easy to pay for the vast sea of music. Maybe even before Spotify I could also have paid for some obscure artists, whose music I got from a torrent site, by finding out how to contact them and then paying with Paypal or some other way. But I did not as it was not easy enough.

I also think that there is something deeply interesting in seeing other people in their private space, and especially when there is nothing scandalous going on. I for example sometimes enjoy the moments when I see my girlfriend lost into herself when focusing on some everyday task. Then when she realizes that I was looking she gets a bit embarrased, and that is very cute, too. The whole scenario of her and me is ok, because there is this love and acceptance between us. It’s also important part of intimate relationship, that you accept the fact that the other is going to see you in your private zone. It’s a choice you make, it’s not one way mirror, so to speak.

Speaking of which… we could also have a non-scandalous site:

safe.onewaymirror.everywhere

Where the only point is just to expose privacy without any really bad intent. I could imagine people who would naively upload content there “because she/he was just so cute when doing that”, without understanding what kind of insult it really is. Just like how you sometimes hear people talking about their children as a kind of show animals.


#31

TOR connects you to the clearnet internet. The SAFE Browser only connects you to SAFE websites.


#32

This.

This is not a problem that SAFE creates. It already exists currently on the internet, has existed since the printing press was invented, has existed since speech has been invented.

My point is that is not a problem that SAFE creates and cannot fix since it exists today on the web and will exist anywhere people are free to make comments. The site you suggest has many forms on the current internet. One to hit the news was a revenge site where vids where uploaded.

So why is it something the SAFE network should be concerned with, its a human nature problem.


#33

Yes, it is not a problem SAFE creates. But it is problem that’s going to be different in the environment SAFE creates, compared to for example the environment of face to face speech.

To you this question seems to be very binary. A thing exist or does not exist, end of story. To me this is not interesting.

I’m interested in if and how this and other kinds of behaviours is affected by the advancing technology.

And I’m not asking SAFE to fix it. Maybe I’m in a wrong topig though. Maybe this discussion should be in “What SAFE does to the normal net” or “Problems of SAFE and their rebuttals.”

Ok then, is it also the case that SAFE network should not be interested in how it affects the good sides of human nature? Like “Yes, human nature has a tendency for altruistic behaviour, but that’s has been the case for eternity. Technology should not care about that.”


#34

I guess its binary because as far as SAFE is concerned (which is the purpose of this forum) it has no mechanism to help out. And since this very problem is also in the current web to almost the same level of a problem. And due to the “streisand effect” could even be worse on the web where juicy stuff is duplicated far and wide to counter any attempts at censorship. I cannot see how the network being anonymous can help at all or can be changed to help. It’ll happen anyhow.

Now if you want to discuss Applications and safe sites and how they can deal with the situation then that is far from binary and a huge discussion in itself.

Yes this could be quite interesting.

For anonymous storage it would be interesting if SAFE’s censorship resistance makes this particular problem worse or not.

SAFE:
The private stuff needs only be uploaded once and people will learn that very quickly and so there isn’t the spreading of the private material to many places on SAFE. So in general I think it would be buried/lost very soon after uploading.

Current WEB:
The “streisand effect” has played a big part in spreading private material far and wide whenever someone tries to remove the private material. How far it is spread depends on the noteworthiness of the person or material.

There are already web sites (backed up to the internet archive site) that dedicate themselves to the posting of this private and embarrassing material now. And whenever anyone tries to get the material removed the “streisand effect” proves itself alive and well.

Conclusion:
Its pretty much binary for this particular thing and possibly SAFE will be better since hte “streisand effect” doesn’t get a chance to rear its “ugly” head (very often). But then again its not so much binary as “whats different - not much”

Ah this one would raise many topics from whats worse to whats better. And some pretty binary and some with a lot in between.

I don’t see it that way. We need to concern ourselves with what can be changed or helped and what is out of the realm of software.

So the posting of voyeur/private material is pretty much out of SAFE’s ability to affect and not the purpose of SAFE.

But to free humans from the bonds of insecurity and surveillance, then that is SAFE’s purpose in being written.

To solve world hunger then I’d say that is outside of SAFE.

To solve people’s losing their digital identities because of web hosts being hacked, then that too is an outcome of SAFE’s purpose.

Really you have to go back to WHY SAFE was developed and what benefits to mankind that will bring. Outside of that we can only discuss whether SAFE will make xzy issue better or worse and they are worthy of discussions. And in the case of your “privacy/voyeurism” then I say SAFE is essentially no different to what we have today (in the balance of things) and since its not a reason for SAFE being created then its not a SAFE “problem”. SAFE essentially does not make it worse or better.


#35

Hmm… I still disagree a bit, but I’m not willing to speculate any more, at least for now.

And I think you are right when saying:

On a technical side (which I don’t know much about), if I upload a photo with filename tree.jpg and then upload again the same photo with name bush.jpg - are they same or different files?


#36

If the file contents are exacly the same then there is only one copy stored on the network with the datamap given to the two names. The precise method depends on how the “names” are stored/kept.

So tree.jpg will be given a datamap when it is uploaded. And bush.jpg will be given a datamap. The two datamaps are the same and stored with each file name in each of the directories .


#37

I’m not sure what exactly it is y’all (@Toivo and @Neo) are disagreeing about.


#38

I think we started to circle the same drain by the end there. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes::rofl::exploding_head:


#39

What about if you look at it from a legal standpoint? If I were to contribute to the network and profit from it in the form of Safecoin, can I be held accountable for all the immoral or illicit content on SAFE? I mean, all content, good and bad, is encrypted and scattered across nodes. IMO if you decide to start using SAFE and contribute, you might very well be part in hosting a site with immoral and illicit content without even knowing it.

Now, governments pursue people that actually participate in illegal activities online (whether it’s the regular internet, or TOR for instance). If you decide not to take part in these illegal activities, then you have nothing to worry about.

But what happens when SAFE launches? If you willingly participate in the network, and thus accept that you might accomodate criminals, earning Safecoin in the process, does that make me a criminal? Guilty until proven innocent?

I know it’s maybe a little farfetched, and I understand that every government has it’s own laws. But still…
Could governments deem everyone involved with SAFE an accomplice to all the crimes commited on it?

I might be wandering off topic a little, pardon me.


#40

Nope the same as if you rent hosting services off AWS and some other low life puts up vile stuff. You are no more liable than AWS is even though through your’s and other’s monthly payments AWS can continue to exist and have some low life use their servers to store that illegal stuff

SAFE is a distributed service. If you are going to attempt to enforce such a responsibility then you take millions to court. Just cannot happen no matter how you look at it.