Great Work. Lets see next weeks. Hope to see alpha2.
Good updates and good work team.
My only feedback and I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again.
I am a simpleton. I am not an overly technical person. Although I understand the basic theory of what Maidsafe is trying to achieve with SAFE net and I am also a but of a natural minimalist in almost everything I do and have always been.
Which is why I don’t understand all of the different requirements to download in order to use SAFE net.
So far we have the launcher, browser, web hosting manager, safe mail app, vault and God only knows what else I have left off.
IMHO It should all be in one. One app you download. Once you download and run that and setup your credentials and all that from there you can access everything else. That’s how I would do it personally.
I just think this will confuse the hell out of a LOT of people and many people will miss out.
Ive been following this for a couple years now and even I still;l have trouble with the updates and what I need to download and run and all that.
I might make this a separate post.
How close are we to data chains and beta? Like where are we on the road map?
In the fog with high beams on and close to the exit point of the fog
I think that will depend on how this test goes, but we’re getting pretty close to alpha 2.
Two questions / points:
1.) New localhost feature in SAFE browser:
I’m not 100% sure how this is meant to be used. Should this be used when connecting to a local test net or to access local (non-uploaded) files? If the latter is the case, do I just need a local webserver where e.g. my index.html is served and then I can still use the DOM API and it uses mocking features? Maybe you could clarify for which use-case this is intended.
2.) "SAFE Browsing Enabled"
I think this can be confusing because “safe browsing” is always possible, right? (It’s called SAFE browser for a reason ) I know how it’s meant, but I would suggest “Allow clear net browsing” or something similar because this is the exception.
This, yep. It basically allows you to access anything you would serve from you local system (
127.0.0.1), so yeh, serve your index.html as you please. But then the page in the SAFE Browser has access to all the DOM APIs as if it was on the network. (not mocking features, just standard network).
2). Hmm, yeh we were wondering about the naming there too. It has to be indicative of the safety though. As when it’s not enabled
safe:// sites could make
http requests which could de-anonymise the user… So it’s not just purely about clearnet browsing.
Thanks Maidsafe devs for all your hard work.
Yippy another Test, the storage bump really helps
Happy testing all you super ants out there.
I’d just like to know, as a non techos, when we get to beta, will I be able to use Safenet like I use the current internet. If Yes, I will be ecstatic
First I want to thank all at Maidsafe for working so hard to get this update out, several working very late. I wish you wouldn’t stretch so hard if I’m honest, but am also very grateful that you put so much in.
I think the end result will be very close to this (it already is for the things most none technical people will want to do). You have just the browser, and from there will be able to do everything using Web apps (ie SAFE websites), some of which can be links within the browser and so function as if they are built in - nothing else to install.
The Web hosting manager and other extras (the Launcher is no longer needed at all), are not part of the SAFEnetwork solution, they are examples primarily to show developers how to build this, but also serve to help early adopter users and others (investors, journalists, businesses) to get a taste of what is possible, as well as to help us all test the network. They really are never intended for ordinary users, who will be understandably confused by them.
There are arguments for and against building complexity into the browser, but I like the solution we have:
a browser that does the essentials (browse public websites out of the box, create an account if you want to store data, publish comments on other people’s websites etc, allows you to authorise other apps and so on, and gives you instant access to every Web app that is built on SAFEnetwork just by clicking a link).
and if there are things that work better or which you prefer to use as separate applications you will also be able to install and run those separately, but again with control of what data of yours they can access and store handled in one place, within the browser (the Authenticator).
I think this overall gives us the best of both worlds, and meets your wants better than you realise, perhaps even completely.
Hopefully will soon be able to test.
This sounds already great but it seems I still need a webserver. If you drag’n’drop e.g. an html file the schema is (at least on windows) file:///C:/index.html
This would be even more handy. Would this also be possible?
Good point. Then maybe “Allow unsafe (clear net) requests.”
I suspect so. And is probably desirable.
In the meantime, if you’re working in node, you can grab the httpserver to quickly serve a given folder, eg.
This is a simple webserver to use if you want to get started quickly https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/web-server-for-chrome/ofhbbkphhbklhfoeikjpcbhemlocgigb?hl=en
To open on safe browser type localhost:// URL given by the webserver
Great to hear. Yeah I think it would be really handy if you quickly want to try out some api calls without installing a server.
Thanks for the hint! Will try it out too.
It might just be that I’m on an airport WIFI but I’m not able to access anything on Test 18 right now. It was working last night on a faster network. Anyone else having this problem recently? I’ve specifically tried safe://bit.miffed, safe://tetris, safe://polpolrene/ and logging into the manager.
Edit: Ah, right. Forgot about the IP restrictions on the manager profiles. Updated my IP for my invitation and everything works alright now.
Any guide to install in Ubuntu with apt command
@sushil_kharel no apt repo as of now. Just download the zip for linux, extract and run the safe-browser executable.
No luck getting Web Hosting Manager working. I created a public ID, then clicked “CREATE SERVICE”, typed the name “www” and clicked “Create Service” under “Create a new public container”. After a few seconds red text saying “Access denied” appears. If I click “Create Service” again I get red text saying “Service already exists”. If I go back to the previous, or quit the app, and try returning to the service creation page, a container for the “www” service appears in the dropdown under “Select a container to be mapped”, but clicking the “Create Service” button under that section results in another “Access denied” error message in red text.