Just makes me wonder where the interest in the SAFE Network sits with these . . . (bleeps!).
I have a friend who was an NSA analyst until pretty recently, and while I know they keep things pretty compartmentalized over there, but he hadn’t even heard it mentioned while he was there.
Luckily they always speak the truth at NSA so that’s a trustful source
Yeah I love those guys.
They really know how to make someone feel wanted. And they always keep us company. Very thoughtful group of guys
Plan for worst case and enjoy the difference…
Hopefully, they will take time to really appreciate what SAFE is. A dull default reaction would not be useful, relative to the wider interests they are meant to protect.
While the uk.gov does seem to have understood the simpler challenge posed by blockchain technology’s potential, the worry must be that SAFE is rather a different class of problem than they are good at understanding.
The incompetence of Governments is evidenced at different levels by the spooks’ own existential crisis and likely they will worry their appetite for “knowing all the things”, might be frustrated; and then also by the way terrorism and other wars on nouns are being perpetuated rather than resolved’; and also then by the way politics is suffering from the financial crisis and lack of negative feedback, rather than taking control of it. None of that bodes well for their allowing a liberal tool to function without interference but they would do well to allow progress on this front. Having individuals and businesses secure their privacy and security, will bring many more rewards than such agencies can ever deliver.
These agencies will get hacked and dumped. That is the biggest threat to their funding and continued existence. Petraeus, the fed hack, they are losing this battle. Wait till their budgets are public. These are also the peope who couldnt see 911 coming, making them look complicit and incompetent.
My thought is that it will be way too early to attack the SAFE Network, right up to the time that it is way too late.
I don’t think SAFE will come into their cross-hair until it’s up and running and becoming popular. Even for them highly skilled IT employees are a scarce resource, they probably can’t afford to have them analyse the potential of every start-up in the privacy and security scene. Existing companies and products with significant market share are way more important targets to them.
Do you remember the early days of bitcoin and how long it took the government to cotton on to it’s existence AFTER it was up and running and people were heavily investing in it? It took people crossing borders with apparently “zero” money in their pockets to catch their interest. I don’t think they’ll start noticing maidsafe until people start disappearing from their internet radar or until the safecoin economy grows significantly and by that point they’ll be bleeped.
For now they seem too distracted by Apple trying to make phones that screw people less. But they do have within their ranks certain emerging risks prophets. They certainly have a pretty basic nightmare narrative about getting locked out and dumped. To me that seems like an obvious step toward them becoming transparent.
There are groups like anonymous who would clearly like to bar them from any future where secrecy (not privacy) of any kind would be practical or even allowed. They have to know their existence is at least potentially on the line. It might be traumatic but their capacity to lie to the public can be removed.
States have a history of actively suppressing disruptive tech that goes beyond nukes and stem cells. They at least like to restrict and control adoption. The way SAFE would be on their radar is as a virtual cord cutter. All their power is in those cords, to cut them is to cause loss of power, but also possibly amore livable potentially much safer world.
Here’s an interesting little power-dynamics puzzle:
One type of corp, overwhelmingly doesn’t pay taxes:
Multi-National Tech Conglomerate
One type of corp, only I’ve ever heard of, unwilling to give in to every government request, and willing to publicly speak to that effect:
Multi-national tech conglomerate
Multinational technology companies like MSFT, GOOG, etc. have surpassed governments in power and will one day play a role in governments removal from influence in modern human affairs.
Have to think on that.
I wonder that the Governments are gifting more power and wealth via trade agreements to such monsters simply because they have no imagination to solve the financial crisis; so, instead of seeing natural corrections and failure of those they consider are ‘too big to fail’, they will make policy flex instead. Those trade agreements then are then more likely to be about banks and other financial liabilities but the real effect will be gifting power and wealth to multinational corporations to the point that Governments become vulnerable to them.
The proper answer to the financial crisis is to reboot money… like a millennium bug but better. Either money fails or economics fails. Given that most money is in computer balances, a switch could make a simple correction that strips out the money at the uber-rich end, that which was created by open-ended leveraging and that by rights should not exist. However I doubt we’ll ever see this as the existing power and wealth is geared up against such an idea, after all they would be the ones to lose from that; instead, I expect the route we are on will risk WWIII or a stagnant waste of human capital in others ways that we don’t deserve.
Get rid of sponsorship and conflict of interest based media systems and actually enforce bribery and graft laws instead of conflating bribery (money) with free speech and multinational parasites can be knocked into line quickly. Gov is supposed to be responsive to its people not those who try to buy it.
I’m not so certain. Have you considered what a cloud amounts to?
How about a global cloud?
AFAIK that’s the exact definition of power.
To worry about that requires convincing first that MaidSafe can pull it off. Hell, that it’s even possible in the first place. That requires an upfront investment of time and effort to understand what’s happening here.