Project n99 - An Interactive Platform for Creators


#387

I wasn’t familiar with Friendica until now. The thing I remember was Myspace and I liked how you could change things up on your page. It is my intention to include that feature. Again the terrorists and nazis will need to adhere to our terms of service and jurisdictional laws or risk being banned from the site. I address the issue of personal filters in the above comment but there will also be community moderators and you can report any content for investigation. Keeping in mind, certain over-reporting could be considered spam and violate the terms of service as well, so as a community member it is important to know that if you are going to report, it needs to be something that seriously violated terms, not just something you disagree with.


#388

One does not need to pay to post content. Earned network tokens are used to track user activities on the network and reward them with permissions and privileges that give them more opportunities to monetize themselves by having more trust with the community. And if it is the content that is voted up by the community, it is rewarded with seed. Seed is given for various reasons. Users contributing their time to the network is one such reason, and seed can be used to spend on the contents of the network, or even outside the network via p2p or third party exchanges. I have not worked out all the functionality of the network token and its uses when it comes to likes, streams and such, as I am waiting for community decisions on such matters. I don’t want to be the one to tell people what best works for the community. I realize that what I have said here directly conflicts with previous concepts but we are remaining flexible on such matters so we can make sure we are on the right track with the community needs.


#389

Hi @happybeing , I got a warning that I should talk to other users so I thought I’d say hi and break up my stream a little. I am not a fan of advertising either but what do you think of only user advertisements on our site?


#390

We can not ensure users’ anonymity because that is quite near impossible for any website to guarantee. But we do not require users’ personal information to create an account. It is up to them to log on to the service with a VPN or other security. As far as user info or data that is stored on our database, we hope to encrypt those files on the safe network, and until that time we will take every precaution available to protect user accounts. Users have the ability to connect with anyone they like or find on the network via personal message. I am sure they can arrange to sell goods or services anonymously if they are clever. We encourage users to be upfront about who they are as that lends to better branding but if it is a user who has controversial content we have not limited their ability to use standard tactics to keep their identity hidden. Truly when it comes to activities of the user, it is all their business until they make it the community’s business. In regards to KYC we are using third parties such as coinbase or bitpay or other similar companies to deal with users’ transactions if they choose a currency outside of our native crypto. However, those transactions will be more costly to the recipient if they make that choice. We have options to purchase insurance for transactions, and international shipments can be dealt with between the parties, or from our trusted service, whichever they prefer. As far as your Scottish Broadsword, well you’ll have to take the same risk that you would with e-bay using our service, which works most of the time. Keeping in mind, they have had nearly twenty years to perfect the crappy service that is the e-bay system now. So hopefully we will be allotted some time to make our system a good one. Lastly, we do not handle customs and border crossings, the shipping companies handle that. :slight_smile:
One final thing I might add is that your questions now are far less engaging than the ones that you started on this thread. I feel that those questions were pertinent for us to answer and some of these new questions may simply be a waste of our time. I mean that in the most respectful way. In the future I might ask that you keep the questions to the main topic of what you might want for a great network. Instead of on the topic of things that are completely out of our control. I hope that you find this feedback helpful. Thank you for your interest in N99.


#391

One thing I missed was about the taxes. They are always the responsibility of the recipient of any money. I am not an attorney, so neither I nor the Network are able to give you advice when it comes to that.


#392

@Lee_Travis it sounds like it could work, but I think there is a fundamental problem that gets overlooked, and so not really a good idea in the long run.

This is that once advertising (or anything else) is part of a business model based on profit, there’s a constant pressure/temptation to take it just a bit further.

So I think it is best just to create a better alternative without those downsides it temptations - and that to me is what SAFEnetwork is all about (PtP for example).


#393

Well I can see this being a major problem. First off who defines this? Second one of the major advantages of the SAFE network is so that you can bypass “jurisdiction” and post whatever content you want. Third there’s a nice debate going over things like hentai, lolicon, and just artistic expression in general. Does rape play porn get banned because it’s obscene and violent? Does a 3D printed kayak of a woman’s vagina get banned (no seriously a girl in Japan made one of those, it’s awesome but weird and yes it did get banned and she did get charged for it I believe) get banned because there are people that consider it obscene? Do we censor hentai like they do in Japan or leave it uncensored like they do in the rest of the world? Why on earth do people find a beheading such a big deal you watch much more graphic stuff for ENTERTAINMENT! But the point is: Why are you bending knee to governments and why do you assume that this is something settled when the whole advantage of the SAFE network is people can actually have an UNCENSORED internet? We build an uncensored and DECENTRALIZED internet and you want to reintroduce censorship with “Term of Service” and “community moderators”? Facebook and Google much? Are you kind of missing the point here of the SAFE network? Screw the home owners association if they’re going to dictate how I can build my house or who I can sell to.

If that’s the case why do you need moderators and terms of service? Make a decision. Filters or moderators. Having both doesn’t make sense and is also a waste of resources. I’d opt for filters.

So how are you not Facebook, Google or the conventional internet?

Yes, it conflicts and what you said here makes absolutely no sense. Though I’d say Likes, like Shares, should go towards earning seeds not cost seeds since one is performing a service by reviewing content. Better yet have an actual rating system like on amazon or something. So instead of just liking stuff give it a star count or go from red (bad) to green (good) something to indicate quality and be a quick review of content.

Not on the SAFE network it’s not. You seem to be implying you’ll attempt to mix your clearnet site with the SAFE network. This is not only technically impossible as the SAFE network does not communicate with the clear network but is also a security risk. Why would someone on the SAFE network risk their security by using your app if their data will be exposed by you posting it on the website. Why would one need a VPN on a decentralized encrypted internet?

Also it’s not impossible for any website to keep it’s users anonymous. duckduckgo.com does it, Startpage.com does it. Any search engine offering anonymous search results offers anonymity to some degree. You’re right a VPN would help, so does end to end encryption. But wait isn’t that what a decentralized internet is for? So why are you using the clear net?

From what you’ve described so far you’re just creating another online store that happens to use cryptocurrency.

You must be American. They have this thing where the customer calculates their own taxes on goods and services. Everywhere else the store includes the taxes in the price. If I order something on Amazon my final subtotal INCLUDES the taxes. So no I would NOT expect it to be my responsibility to calculate the taxes on whatever I bought. Especially considering it’s the SELLER who is ultimately going to be paying sales tax. As an artist yes, but I’d still imagine that there should be some inferstructure in the software to help with vendor options like that as if one is selling a great deal of art one is essentially starting up their own litle online store. And given your emphasis on jurisdiction taxes seem to be part and parcel.

You interest level isn’t my concern. How you code your software and the socio-economic and political implications thereof are. Everything I’ve been talking about DOES relate directly to n99. Do you need me to make you a flow chart?

Let me make this simple. Moderators suck. Moderators = government. The whole advantage to n99 is allowing for decentralized anonymous art to be published. But the more you talk about using the clear net the less advantageous n99 is because it loses the advantage of decentralized encrypted anonymous internet. We started this whole conversation talking about piracy and copyright. But copyright is pointless especially on a decentralized encrypted internet. It’s pointless on the regular internet but it’ll be utterly useless on the SAFE network. Then you start talking about your community as a social network and I point out the problems with opposing viewpoints and your first thought is moderators and censorship. But people came to the SAFE network to GET AWAY from censorship and moderators. So the audience for n99 on the SAFE network will largely be people who want nothing to do with moderators or terms of service because that is exactly what they’re trying to get away from. Your stated goal is oppose corporations but right now you’re doing everything corporations do. You’re moderating content like Google and Facebook, you’re unable to keep people from pirating the content posted to the network which effectively means you’re vunerable to the same thing corporations are. But what bothers me is you aren’t clearly defining your terms. Like “jurisdiction” or who is “we” that’s writing your terms and service? Where is this “community discussion” you keep mentioning?

Perhaps you should look into how Silk road functions. If people can ship illegal drugs from point a to b surely you can figure out how to ship art from a to b reliably either directly or through some third party escrow service. Either way I don’t think there is a reliable risk that some random aanonymous person will take my money and not send me any product. An escrow service and reputation system of some kind would reduce this risk.

Please try to remember that SAFE is not ebay.

Here is a question, a very pertinent question. Is n99 a SAFE web app/program or is it a clearnet web app? It cannot be both, or at the very least the two communities will be separate. There are those on SAFE who will not go on the clearnet. There are those on the clear net who will not go on SAFE. So which is it? What are you doing?

Now one could argue that they don’t want terrorist videos or child porn on n99 because they lack artistic merit or even because one doesn’t want to fund terrorists or pedophiles. But there is much porn that lacks artistic merit and many who would see it banned outright. Nevermind political videos or activism. Anything that challenges the status quo or powers that be ends up getting censored. Proof of this is in all the sites Google is attempting to censor which have nothing to do with “offensive content”.

If you base membership on n99 on real world jurisdiction then you are endorsing and prejudice. It’s all fun and games to hate pedophiles and terrorists but how about a woman in Saudi Arabia creating content and speaking out against female oppression? How about a gay activist that could be killed? How about an atheist or heretic who would definitely be killed in such countries? How about someone in Taiwan that spoke out against the monarchy? See by basing n99 on jurisdictional laws you are banning people for political dissent. Not every country in the world even remotely respects free speech and those that play lip service to it find ways around it.


#394

@Blindsite2K I am going to take some time to absorb your argument because I feel as though it is a circular argument, making it a fallacious one, or one that can’t be answered as it contradicts itself. In one aspect it calls for freedom and by having freedom it needs to break control or reassign control. Freedom and control are a double-edged sword. You can’t have one without the other, like yin and yang, or your Scottish broadsword. If I am going to explore with you I would appreciate if you gave me as much respect as I have given to you. I have tried to answer your questions with the disclaimer that I don’t have all the answers.
I did ask you things that you didn’t answer; you just selectively picked through my responses, and it is becoming very similar to trolling. So it would be nice if you considered it as I intended, in its entirety. That said, I feel that you are very intelligent, maybe much smarter person than I, and you have very viable questions from time to time. I feel those are constructive and it would be my mistake to ignore those, especially the last one, but it will require some thought.


#395

I apologize if I have missed questions. And despite my passion I don’t mean to be overtly disrespectful. If I do miss questions then simply line them up and ask them again plainly. Also if you feel I am being circular or contradictory please explain how. Note it is my position security = freedom. One does not gain security by sacrificing freedom, one in fact loses it.

Oh BTW I did an edit on the last post. You might want to give it a read while doing your deliberations.


#396

I think I can help here a wee bit at least. Tim jumped into Troon to see us recently. We were the usual busy and really not wanting meetings etc. but Tim has been a good guy so I took an hour out to speak (when I say speak, I mean internally stop developing SAFE, it’s my issue though, but I always hate being stopped). Anyway as I said Tim’s been decent so we had a chat for an hour.

What he told me was they had developed the big picture in clearnet and intend on moving bits to SAFE when SAFE can handle it. I went over the different approach decentralised verses centralised apps are and we threw around some ideas. The outcome was Tim is trying to get some apps ready to help his offering and run on SAFE and in doing so help us test the SAFE APIs and allow his team to see the opportunities and different approaches they can take, along with hopefully more advanced features clearnet apps could not provide.

Anyway, quick convo, but Tim seems as dedicated to SAFE as he has always been, even with a certain you know who (a 23 year old with 10 years wall street experience, can build SAFE in weeks etc. safex founder, ,falls out with a lot of people, you know the guy :wink: ) trying to persuade him otherwise, Tim has always been a backer, but not technical. So he has struggled to get tech help, but seems very happy now with the team and seems he wants to 1. get a product and 2: get that product on SAFE. I said at least 1: is a step forward and lets hope 2: can be achieved with even more features. Lets hope so, if Tim pulls it off then great, not a huge budget and some hard bends in the road, but it would be a feat for sure. Seems like a lot has been done in the last while, so I wish him well with it, I know he is trying hard and seems to be reaping rewards now. Not easy, but its not supposed to be.

Hope you don’t mind the post @we_advance or @Lee_Travis I hope it adds some clarity.


#397

If an organization is not for profit, is it a business model, or is it just a distribution of profit to the users? If it is user run advertisements and it makes profit the users win on both fronts. The key is user owned and operated. Is PtP peer to peer, or something different? If so does anyone talk about peer networks being owned by peers?


#398

Ptp is pay the producer. So uploader of content gets paid when people access it. Assuming artists upload the best quality and in a way they attract their fanbase, it could work. ofc pirates can upload first, but not if artists just do that be default and store on SAFE etc.

I think what @happybeing means (correct me if wrong Mark) is that “based on profit” is not the same as “profiting from providing value” . So sell poison to people and tell them it’s good for them, only to make profit or sell something actually good for people that will help them, or at least you hope it will. sort of like don’t start a business to profit, start it to change the world and if you can do basic arithmetic you will profit from it and hopefully do more good.

Another way I look at it is, for profit, rob a bank, its simpler, more likely to succeed and perhaps even morally better than selling false hope to people (working day loans etc.). However to do good and get paid is much better.


#399

Apologies, PtP is short for Pay the Producer, a scheme mooted by David whereby the network automatically pays the uploader of content based on how popular it is (implemented as a percentage of farming rewards). A bit, er contentious (search this forum if you dare :wink:), so expected to be trialled but not necessarily implemented, and not a priority - so post SafeCoin.

If you can do advertising in a way that is not evil & can’t become evil, I guess that would be OK, but I think that’s a hard problem and am skeptical.


#400

Thank you @happybeing , @dirvine , that clarifies things a bit, now I know. :wink:


#401

Let’s discuss freedom shall we? If you want to have a 100% freedom = personal liberty, you have to have 100% control = security, over your personal liberty. If so, you must stop someone else from having 100% of their freedom and control of their personal liberty. To have 100% freedom and control you would have to be the only one. As soon as you introduce someone else they have to be considered and that will hinder the 100% freedom, thus affecting the 100% control = security. That is why it is a double-edged sword. If the sword is used to cut someone else’s control (their security) for your freedom, then you step into the control role, control over their freedom. The only thing that makes sense is to share in the burden of freedom and control. By negotiating what is acceptable and what is not. This has always been the dilemma of society, or am I missing something?


#402

I am not sure what personal liberty means, but we cannot have 100% of pretty much anything. We live in a connected plethora of stuff, if we try and have 100% of any of it we fail. We can however strive to ensure that control over thoughts at least remains with people. Beyond that it gets very deep very fast and then gets philosophical very fast, therefor subjective and then the egos all start :slight_smile: So I keep away from guarantees, impossibilities, 100%, 0% etc. as much as possible.


#403

I don’t believe this at all. For example if I go shop at the store I have 100% control of what I buy and my ability to buy and make purchases, or even choose which store to shop at does not affect others ability to make the same choices. However if the store made a policy that only people of a given identity, religion, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc could shop at that store then my identity or politics and whether I could shop anonymously or not would come into play as would that of others. Generally I consider NAP (non aggression principle) for determining voluntary policy. So drawing a picture that offends someone doesn’t count as something that should be banned because no one is compelled to view the picture. As you say there are block and filter options. However harrassing or threatening someone in real life would be a different matter since it would be the initiation of force. So say you wrote a blog or story or essay against feminism. That’s a general statement. But if one directly messages a woman with rape and death threats for posting pro feminist literature (and utilizing the same freedom of speech rights which allows others to write the anti feminist blogs etc for example) then THAT would be bad. But since we have a BLOCK feature mods don’t really become a issue either.

If n99, or any organization for that matter, can moderate content, that means n99 can TRACK content. Even content that is marked private. If n99 is not a copyright policing app then why is it a content policing app? Why does n99 see itself liable for content but not copyright? If n99 can be sued for “offensive content” why can it not be sued for copyright infringement? (ex. Like isohunt has had such issues.)

@Lee_Travis is n99 essentially a) a non profit society b) a cooperative or c) more like bittorret or something where people are essentially using a piece of peer to peer software? You use the phrase “user owned” a lot but fail to clearly define that. There a lot of “user owned” organizations and your definitions of n99 seem to shift a lot.

@dirvine Thank you for your commentary and clarification. The key difference for me is that I think it will be very difficult to “port” an organization the size and scale of n99 to SAFE once it’s established one way or the other as a clearnet site and SAFE site are very different technically and more importantly the communities they appeal to operate under different sets of assumptions. Namely one assumes an environment where one is NOT secure and is not anonymous and the other where one is secure and is and very easily can be anonymous. It’s like comparing building something on land on a mountaintop or deep underwater.

@Lee_Travis to get back to the freedom discussion. Say someone drew a picture of Mohamad. Muslims would consider that worthy of death and there are countries where one would literally be killed for that, killed for drawing a blasphamous picture. This is another example of why anonymity or lack thereof is no laughing matter: people’s lives are at stake. This is another reason I am against censorship of all shapes and forms. Because I don’t believe people should be killed or locked in a cage for self expression of any kind and censorship is one of those binary things: you either have it or not. You can’t be a little bit unfree. You are either free or not. You are either censored or not. Censorship is either justified or not. I’d say not. You either have encryption and are secure or not. Security is like pregnancy. So either you can be censored and are unsecure or you CAN’T be censored and ARE secure. The perceived advantage to n99 I had was that it offered a SECURE distributed content platform. But if it’s NOT secure then it’s little more than another youtube/facebook combo. I am emphasizing this because if you have a crack in your opsec somewhere your whole system goes poof as does the security of your userbase. N99 does not want to have an Ashley Madison incident.


#404

@Blindsite2k You win! I give up, you got me, I am the Antichrist. All of what you said is duly noted! :slight_smile:


#405

You are not the antichrist. I am not trying to make you out to be the villian. If that has been my impression I sincerely apologize. However THIS is why we need decentralized internet so that we can get away from much of this political squabbling. This is why user identity must remain secure. Why EVERYONE must have FREEDOM and why architecture must be built with that in mind. If I have hurt you or made you to feel I am “trolling” or in any way trying to be disrespectful or malicious I again apologize. It is my intent to point out the flaws in the system and the futility of creating an “anti corporate” system based on the idea of protecting artist copyright. Copyright itself IS a corporate idea: it is a notion of creating artificial scarcity where none in ACTUALITY exists. And in order to have COPYRIGHT you need censorship and surveylance. This leads to compromising other concepts like user privacy, ideology and other such things. I love the idea of distributed content and paying artists for their content. It’s just you seem to basing your concept of ownership on that of the one of scarcity. Art is based on ideas and ideas cannot inherently be owned. Ideas are powerful, transformative, revolutionary but they cannot be OWNED. The futility of ownership of ideas is proving more and more futile day by day. Moreover the danger of attempting to own ideas is proving more real day by day. One cannot take possession of an idea without censorship and surveilance which inevitably puts the rest of society at risk.

You are not bad. You have been exceedingly kind and patient in fact. You are not the antichrist or the devil or any such figure. But I do think you need to take a hard look at the values n99 is based on and the ramifications thereof. Also consider whether it will be on the clearnet or SAFE net, or even a darknet of some other kind like Tor, because they are very different environments. Consider the SAFETY of your users. Consider what kind of market you are appealing to.

Also I wasn’t joking about asking whether n99 was a non profit, co op or a DAO of some kind? These are very different models and different relationships between users.


#406

I felt that I was dismissed from the conversation, as soon as my Nationality was presumed, as if my understanding for human suffering and the cause thereof, is less than others. But In fact my life has been devastated by the same.