SAFE Network Alpha Release!


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


I had some issues related to audio in the beginning. Would not play the video unless I changed codec from AAC to MP3.
Perhaps your issue?


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


It works for me on Firefox wont load in IE. I checked the audio it is AAC, I found it to be problematic. When you convert to Mp4 you should have the option to select MP3 as your audio option. Worth a try if you are having difficulties.



SAFE Beaker Browser Updates (0.4.0)

Here is another site that I’ve been helping build. Here is my early draft of a maker profile page http://mranderson.safenet/travisremington.html

@chadrickm everything seems to run good at http://mranderson.safenet , except the contact page since it is written in php. Any advice on how to keep in page forms on safe right now?


Yes on your safenet site the links when followed just error. No clearnet or safe. I would check the html code and play around with /page.html versus page.html


Very cool! Brain is a little fuzzy today. Got it in 38 clicks.


Looks better on the SAFE Browser :smile:


Everything looks better on the SAFE Browser :smile:

MMmmmmm… that’s some sweet safe:// protocol :wink:


Mmmmmm… I’m lovin’ it!


Stupid question after installing safe-launcher, what is the command to run it?

wget -O -|sudo apt-key add -
sudo wget -O /etc/apt/sources.list.d/maidsafe.list
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install safe-launcher


The binary is called:


so type that into a terminal.

On my system, Debian stable (Jessie), that command runs the launcher.

The path was:


…which made me curious because that’s not on my PATH. A search revealed that the installation procedure puts a symlink on my PATH:

/usr/bin/safe_launcher -> /opt/maidsafe/safe_launcher/safe_launcher


Thanks, it worked. But that makes no sense. If the launcher is installed with sudo apt-get install safe-launcher. Logic would tell you the command to run the launcher would be safe-launcher not safe_launcher. :unamused:


Perhaps because one is the name of the application while the other is the name of the executable.

In cases where I am lost finding something in the file haystack (not on this occasion) I’ll open a terminal and search on part or whole of its name, and that might require more than one iteration on different variations.

$ find / -iname safe-launcher 2>/dev/null


$ find / -iname "safe*" 2>/dev/null

(bingo, finds the symlink in /usr/bin)

$ which safe*

(bingo again, finds the symlink)


This is a very good point and is probably an oversight in the debian package setup process.

Should be correctible easy tho by having the symlink in /usr/bin called safe-launcher for debian which can then point to the internal binary /opt/maidsafe/safe_launcher/safe_launcher

Will certainly keep a note of this to correct it for future debian packages without which it does make it quite confusing. Sorry for that mess there.

Problem running safe-launcher on Ubuntu 14.10

This seems to be an issue with debian packaging guidelines not allowing _ in program name

I would say either rename the program to safe-launcher to make it compatible or at least include both safe-launcher and safe_launcher as symlinks. It would be bad to have different distros start the program by different command.


Good call - executables with underscores or dashes in them are annoying in general too, IMO. It just makes them more difficult to type/remember, especially when you can’t tab complete (or don’t know how to).

safelauncher, safedemo, etc, would be better, IMO.


Or safenetwork and safedemo etc :wink:


It’s an alternative to capitalization, which would be even worse.