I think people feeling coerced by the network because the developers won’t cater to a very specific ideologies is asking a bit much. You still have choices such as do whatever you want with the code, that’s far better than the options a govt will give you! You still have freedom of choice and your very own encrypted network with all the features you wish. That word coersion, does not apply here.
5 Likes
Morally speaking, I follow the non aggression principle.
If Maidsafe decides of their own free will to pay whomever they like (Farmers, Developers, Producers), then that is their choose as the creators on the network. If however, they pay me as a farmer for providing resources (at an agreed rate) and then demand that I give them a percentage of that payment back against my will; or worst, demand that I give them a detailed account of what I do with the funded I earned (to ensure I’m not doing anything “illegal”) than that is coercion and morally wrong.
Those who use the moral argument against PtD and PtP are not seeing the similarities that PtF has with PtD and PtP IMO.
I remain on the fence for PtP not for moral reasons but because of the technical complexities involved in quantifying and paying out for subjective producer content.
Give up your farming rewards and then your moral argument can stand in my view. The simple question really does boils down to:
5 Likes
You guys might argue as much as you want against @TylerAbeoJordan, but with all due respect, I think you are missing the point. The question that Tyler ask is not whether or not he is right to think like he is, you could fill thousands of pages and never get to an answer.
The question is whether or not PtP might hurt the adoption of Safe more than it might help it.
What I hear Tyler ask is (please tell me if I’m wrong Tyler):
Can you make the case that PtP won’t affect the popularity of Safe at all?
Or do you make the case that it won’t affect the perception of Safe enough to make a dent?
Or do you argue that it doesn’t matter what the public might think and we shouldn’t based the feature of Safe on that?
In short, does PtP helps more then it hurts?
That’s what this is about.
3 Likes
Try to edit existing post by adding another piece of quoted text on tablet and you’ll understand… That amounts to cruel and unusual punishment and creating another, separate post was justified.
The network doesn’t have morality, just like CPUs don’t.
And maybe you might reread the OP. I’m not concerned morally or otherwise with what people (farmers) are paid to store. I’m concerned morally with what people (producers and developers) are paid (by all of us) to produce.
But you already started with an assumption, that the uploading of certain data is immoral. What did I miss?
We have a number of topics on illegal porn. You set out to address its morality, but instead you seem to be arguing about the network design, and I explained to you (and recently to @goindeep) that the network cannot function if it doesn’t work well enough for illegal users (too).
Bitcoin miners can’t know which transactions are used to pay for crime and users can’t control whether their transactions are validated by miners from a country that citizens of his country aren’t allowed to do business with. If you pay tx fee to such a miner you may be violating you country’s laws.
I am not for or against those schemes; I just commented on the topic at hand. I did express my concerns related to the economics of the network a number of times and continue to participate in those discussions. I wish you could focus on the novel side of the topic, this immorality of “illegal” (clearly a relative term, as I illustrated in that example) content, otherwise you shouldn’t be able to justify the creation of yet another duplicate topic.
If you want an off topic answer from an economic perspective: PtP does support the network in the sense that it creates demand for Safecoin required to post (and view) content. When someone learns he can make some coins by simply reposting a porn movie, he can figure out whether the ROI is positive or not. If it is he’ll buy some Safecoins and go ahead. His demand for coins and file serving can then be met by the supply of SAFE “work” that comes from the farmers. It am not a fan of PtP because it rewards the publisher and not necessarily the author, but this is the case with any content, not just illegal porn.
How about this:
- PtP/PtD doesn’t exist (never got introduced)
- child porn is posted by enthusiastic pedophiles who did not produce it; they are merely reposting stuff they found on darknet and sharing it on public shares “for everyone’s benefit”
Under these conditions, would you still “support” the network?
If not, what would be your moral objection in this case?
And if you don’t mind, the earlier question about the immorality of posting (not producing) child porn.
1 Like
As can an ordinary day time job. Yes, farming can pay the farmer who then is able to do anything with the farmed safecoins. But, I think there clearly is a difference between this and a user getting paid directly by the network for providing illegal content. If you take a daytime job and use the salary to fund yourself doing an illegal act, is rather different than being paid directly for doing the illegal act. At least in my mind.
Being paid by the network for storing possible illegal content may also be an moral issue that can be discussed (and certainly will be en masse), but maybe this is less of a concern than the network paying producers and content makers.
2 Likes
Illegal according to which jurisdiction? Would Maidsafe be immoral then for paying farming rewards to those who continue to farm where it has been made illegal by the regulators?
2 Likes
The point of the article is the aspect of creating a “neutral medium” through which to communicate. Air is a neutral medium because it passes sound waves indiscriminately, regardless of the content. The SAFE Network is very similar in this regard.
On the SAFE Network, all stored content is accessed via an app. Apps are an integral and required component of the network and are the layer at which the real usefulness and innovation of the network is built out. One can’t really make a “child porn app”. One could make an app which accesses indexes of child porn, but the retrieval system is generic. You could easily use that same app to access most anything. App devs are getting rewarded for retrieving chunks of data, regardless of its content.
One can similarly have apps that focus on retrieving “only good stuff” which could similarly be used to access child porn is the User had the data map for such.
In whatever case, the data is passed indiscriminately, like air passes sound. It’s a mechanical fact, and valuable generically because we don’t wish to live in a soundless, or dataless world.
My problem with PtP is different. If someone is being paid for content they post, this seems more something that should be subject to discrimination of the recipient. I’m not sure about this one, but the necessity of PtD I’m certain of.
5 Likes
I know I sound like a broken record but as suggested before, app could get rewarded by putting data on the network instead of from getting it. Then the moral choice of supporting a specific app and its content is done by the user and not by the network.
The choice of which apps to use IS the province of the user, not the network.
1 Like
True, but the payment doesn’t come from the pocket of the user, so they are only passively supporting it. When it comes from their pocket, they are actively supporting it. For me that’s a big difference.
1 Like
I do see what you mean, sort of, but don’t see a better way to do it. Paying apps to PUT data seems the wrong incentive structurally.
Honestly, I don’t see the extremity of the moral dilemma here.
1 Like
What do you mean?
I guess I prefer when people put their money where their mouth is instead of using a proxy to do it for them. Especially when the proxy is actually you and me. Sure support them, but do it on your own account please?
They they’d complain it’s wrong because it rewards pedophiles to post illegal content.
2 Likes
The value of data is in its retrieval, not in its storage. A User considers it valuable to store data for whatever reason. The User pays for this directly to the network. Apps are not required to store the data. It is an inherent network function.
Apps are paid for retrieving and manipulating retrieved data in ways of value to the User. Thus they are paid. The network serves the End User, always. App devs and Core dev pool get paid to help make this possible as a whole. [quote=“DavidMtl, post:32, topic:7791”]
I guess I prefer when people put their money where their mouth is instead of using a proxy to do it for them. Especially when the proxy is actually you and me. Sure support them, but do it on your own account please?
[/quote]
Ultimately, everything is paid by the End Users, whether they be producers or consumers. “The Network” is actually not an entity. It is a manifestation of cooperative action.
3 Likes
I think it’s more accurate to say it rewards app developer for providing them a way to post their illegal content. And the reward comes from the user uploading the data and not from the network. It’s a cut on the PUT cost so the uploader is actively supporting the dev with his own money, that’s the nuance I’m trying to make.
I see this as affiliate marketing done by the network. The network wants valuable data for farmer to store and the app dev helps get that data. The reward is a cut on the PUT cost.
Then someone needs to access that content, and find out about that content. There is more than the underlying coin distribution has to disemminate content somehow, if a content is not favorable people can make the decision to not access it.
And also publishing the negative content opens the possibilty to discover who did the illegalities. If discovered obviously laws peoples and govt do what they do coerce and extort the funds out of the people or encumber their further activities.
I just made an example with “illegal” content. The point I think TylerAbeoJordan wants to address is what (if any) moral issues people may have with a network that (blindly) pays people for uploading illegal or “amoral” content. Janitor argues that the network is agnostic to moral values, but that is not addressing the issue since it is people that make use of moral values, and the design of the network may influence how people think it handles moral or ethical issues, and this in turn may influence whether people want to use it or not. Some may object to participate in a network that blindly pays everyone, some wont. I think it is an interesting question.
EDIT. As Grizmoblust says below, the word used should probably be “ethical” rather than “moral”.
1 Like
In the end, I think rewarding on GET is just very sad. It’s the result of the notion that given the perfect digital monetary system people can’t be convince to actively support stuff they care about. It’s really defeatist honestly.
2 Likes
what?? lol 20 charts
It is an interesting question and all I am trying to point out is that if one is being honest in asking that question then they would see how farming also applies and that supporting farming but not the developers or producers based on this question is a contradiction.
As far as I understand, the network plans to blindly pay farmers and that is why I am here. Does this go against my morals because there will also be criminals farming? No! Neither does PtD and PtP go against my morals for that same reason. You can not support one and not the other on moral grounds.
Edit: I can see how PtP would attract a lot more illegal content and bad press a lot faster then PtF and PtD which is one of the many reasons why I do not fully support it.
I say we should lay low for as long as we can in the beginning while building the ant colony. I still think that the PtP risk out ways the benefits in regards to bad press. PtP should not be tested or implemented IMO until much later in our development when we are strong enough to stand against the name calling that will be coming our way such as MAIDSAFERS ARE IMMORAL CRIMINALS WHO FUND CHILD PORNOGRAPHY!!!
3 Likes