Straddling the Clearnet for the sake of Mass Adoption by way of Familiar Social Interactions

Just wanted to bump this thread.

I remember reading somewhere that there will be a firefox SAFE search plugin.

Is this still on the cards and how will it effectively work? Will there be a prompt to download the launcher and what specifically will the search results be showing?

True but once they are on SAFE you can make other pub Ids and inform them of whatever level of trust you choose. Let’s be honest most of our “friends” on facebook we don’t really know.

Also I was thinking of that idea for a website porting app. Crowdfund enough money and the app would port a website to SAFE. If you can find the same sites on SAFE then there’s more incentive to move.

Such straddling will not happen. People will use SAFEnet only for things that cannot be done on clearnet. People can already do selfies, what they had for lunch, and (particularly in the case of the females) exhibitionistic accumulation of likes and friends, on Facebook.

This is so duuuh squared that I’m surprised I have to keep pointing it out.

1 Like

Familiar social interactions … and (particularly in the case of the females) exhibitionistic accumulation of likes and friends

Isn’t that because both parties involved have to be very careful:

Mating Habits

The female bluebird’s habit of multiplying her mates is said to be beneficial rather than detrimental in many situations. One reason points to the fact that females normally do not have a chance of seeing all available mates before picking a mate. So if a female selects a mate from a limited group, a better mate might come by the following day.

Another reason for multiply mating is that the chosen mate may not have the best territory or the best site to build a nest. Or the male that is most helpful may not have the best genes for battling parasites. Other studies have different explanations like the female bluebirds mate with other males in the hope of finding a responsible partner to care for her young notably when her original mate leaves the nest for a long time.

As for the males, they practice various strategies especially the floaters or those males that do not have their own territory. The options of these male bluebirds are to share a female with another male, challenge a male for his territory or replace a male that has died or left the nest for good. The adult survival rate is said to be low among bluebirds thus, many females become widowed or deserted by their mates early on.

1 Like

To see where straddling and poaching of users would occur, it is sufficient to look at projects that already do, to some degree, what SAFEnet intends to do much better. You don’t have to make shit up that has little or no basis.

  1. Tor and other “anonymous and uncensorable” networks, both for communication and for the hosting of hidden services.

  2. VPNs and proxy services.

  3. Secure, peer-to-peer file storage.

  4. THE crypto-currency (this is a killer app all in itself).

  5. Compute as a utility, and the perfect substrate for IoT.

That’s a good start: one can spend a lifetime working in any of those areas.

Just to be contrary, I think straddling is a good idea. The best technology does its function so well that it becomes ubiquitous, to the point that users don’t think about how well it works … ethernet is one example of a technology that just works… it doesn’t demand that users bend to it’s notions of what it might be useful for, it’s just provides for all.

Any technology that suggests it is for everyone, needs to consider how it makes itself available for everyone.

The clearnet website that sees merit in lower cost SAFE data storage should do that without users being aware of it.

The more trivial we can make using SAFE, the more people will find themselves using it without necessarily having had to jump some hurdle. So, making some product or interface or utility function that is useful, and isn’t only about its being SAFE but is more about being useful and that it is also SAFE is a minor aspect - albeit important added value, then the more people will get sucked in.

Relying only on notions of privacy; security; and freedom, will not draw everyone. So, those not attracted to any idealistic aspect of SAFE, need to be drawn in to using it for different reasons and through different channels. The lazy Facebooker who wants to communicate with their ‘friends’ and sees an options that also happens to tick a box that is privacy; and security, might opt to that because it’s newer, fresher and just works well, rather than an old app that isn’t the newest shiny toy.

So, the straddle perhaps will follow engaging new devs and new types of developer.

There’s a thread somewhere recently with a post I rather liked about the need to engage new devs
… found it… How to attract more developers? - #5 by pds

Make it trivial for webdevs and they will incidentally make their toys SAFE compatible, in ways that users don’t need to care about until such feature catches their attention and draws them in.


It would help if you were a little more specific:

If privacy is not a motivator then you need to spell out what is.

Occupying OSI levels 1-4 (physical up to transport) ethernet does not require authentication and is promiscuous in that sense. SAFE is above that level and is a lot pickier about what it connects to.

I suspect you really mean to reflect that you ‘want’… not need. It’s like should being opinion… there’s no reason everyone must XYZ… some necessarily will be doing ABCs… and why exclude them.

There’s no escaping the fact that, unlike with ethernet, the user is necessarily part of the loop of authentication. Putting the three factors of the user credentials into an automatic system: config file or firmware, severely dilutes the security. That situation is nothing like ethernet, and incompatible with checking a box.

Depends who the ‘user’ is… remember we are entering a time of robots.

Also, if some browser integration occurs, then user might only enter detail once, if it’s not automated and backup encouraged… and the usage there after would be non-intrusive.

If user is visits a clearnet website that stores its data on SAFE, then the user likely won’t even know it.

The point of the OP I expect is that making usage of SAFE trivial, makes it more likely that users will use it… argue if you want over whether they will all make a decision but point stands that lowing the bar so they don’t see a hurdle, will be to everyone’s advantage.

1 Like

I gave specifics in support of my position, and when challenged, your response is vague hand-waving, and then more hand-waving.

Perhaps you miss the point that appeal is more art than science?

Point being that all positions are valid. You can have as many specifics as you want but if they are not relevant, then others will not care for them.

Jiu jitsu’ing the familiar in the way the OP tempts, could be a good route forward for making SAFE familiar.


More arm-waving!

Not all positions can be valid:

As a small, service business owner I have daily experience of the hard fact that getting the word out is the hardest part of such a commercial enterprise, by far, more than everything else put together. I suppose that would have to be called marketing.

Now consider two categories of enterprise, or of activities of one enterprise grouped in two ways:

  1. Products and services that leverage the peculiar advantages of a medium or market niche.

  2. Products and services that are just one more member of a generic crowd.

SAFEnet has certain properties, advantages, peculiar to it. Unique, actually. The things that it will become widely used for will leverage those peculiar advantages. The activities where it will be a relatively small player will be those where its peculiar advantages don’t cause it to stand out.

If you can leverage the natural advantages, then you don’t need to do much marketing. If you don’t then it will be a hard grind getting in front of prospective customers because there will be so many competing voices.

I listed actual areas that I consider advantageous for SAFEnet. You get lots of advantage for minimal expenditure on marketing.

Consider an actual example: Silk Road. Everyone’s heard of it, because of its notoriety. I’m sure they made lots of money with no marketing at all, because the mass media made their name known.

Now consider, say, peer-to-peer file storage. I know I cited it as an example but I consider it the weakest on that list, because it is competing with IPFS, Storj, and others that will no doubt come along. However, what advantage it does have is due to the fact that it will be the most secure of the bunch and most resistant to being broken by legal attack. So, notoriety will get the word out.

Now consider social media: I don’t see any advantage that SAFEnet will have, so it is not going to have a significant presence there. People won’t even have heard of it in that space.

I know, you’re going to mention “freedom” and “privacy.” But most people do not care about those abstractions, and even when they do genuflect to them, it is as part of a crowd of others doing the same, as the conformism of slaves.

The customer is always right… to their mind and to their perspective and interests, their take is the correct one - and the one you should want to appeal to.

Why limit ambition to being niche?.. Why not just become the new normal.[quote=“bluebird, post:22, topic:6782”]
Now consider social media: I don’t see any advantage that SAFEnet will have, so it is not going to have a significant presence there.

… because you don’t see any advantage?

A SAFE social media, is exactly what we should want. A secure and private route to communication is essential for progress. That’s potentially SAFE’s largest impact. You could consider websites are a slow form of social media… but why not have SAFE support fast modes of communication too… they are crying out for it. You can’t trust Facebook or any other similar flavour of social media, for the way they’ve sold out to other interests than those of their users… to the point they actively manipulate the feedback people receive; such actions are the most toxic any society can see. No, people should be able to communicate freely without being manipulated or exploited for a profit - whatever that profit might be.

and so will anyone who cares for SAFE… not because most people anything… but because those matter. Freedom; Privacy; Security are fundamental to a good society and that SAFE is addressing that need is what makes it so remarkable.


That is a non sequitur. I state that not all positions are valid, and you respond with God knows what.

By the way, not all prospective customers are right: a certain amount of filtering is required and some have to be turned away.

OK, then make the case. So far all you’ve done is vagueness.

Show me who is “crying out” to escape from Facebook. Whoever they are, they are very much a minority, or else Facebook would not be so huge. No-one is keeping those people there at gunpoint.

No-one cares about SAFE except the couple of thousand visitors to this forum. People in general care about what they can get, and those abstractions are well down the list for most people, otherwise we wouldn’t have Facebook, central banking, socialism, and so on.

That’s not to say that I don’t care, actually I do. But the color of my caring is dark rather than light, let’s put it that way.

Define: non sequitur

  • a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

Just because you don’t understand the connection, doesn’t suggest there is none!

If you are trying to market a product that is notionally for everyone, then you cannot approach that effectively with an agenda that everyone must think like you and have the same priorities and exclusions.

All positions are valid, where you are appealing to everyone - otherwise you are not appealing to everyone; you are instead appealing to a subset.

is subjective - relative to your position. You maintain you are necessarily correct and yes there will be a difference with others… some will be more right than others and none will be as perfect as you. Yet, that’s missing the point of marketing to everyone… if you approach it like that, then it will be hard work.

Marketing to everyone is easy, where you don’t come at it with an agenda.

No, again you’re missing the points I’m making… because you know you are right.

Rather than answer that simple question, I’ll suggest it’s worth considering why Facebook is successful. If SAFE is to replace that with something that is inherently better for being with privacy and security - that engendering freedom and therefore progress in a real sense, then SAFE will need to adopt aspects of what made Facebook useful that so many people did and still do use it.

Facebook sucked people into it; LinkedIn did it in a similar way less powerfully… they made it easy to get it and attractive for having useful new routes to communication that appealed to people’s egos and relationships.

Facebook and LinkIn are dying and people are looking for the next big thing™… they don’t like the rounds of invasion of privacy and manipulation that go on. Same with Reddit. You can argue the timing is wrong but give it time and they will fall… because the next big thing™ has an edge that isn’t those issues users have found problematic. Those issues need not be privacy and security - though they could well be; they could be a run of alsorts but where that occurs and the forward thinking devs fix that and use SAFE because they can or because it’s useful for that, then you’ll rue arguing against the OP’s thought.

That is a non sequitur.

The point was talk of freedom and privacy not talk of SAFE. People who care about SAFE will talk about freedom and privacy… but more than visit here care about those.

Again consider:

We talk of those not because most people anything… but because those matter.

Back to front? Confused? Dark rather than light… hmm.

1 Like

Also people do not need to “log into” SAFE to be able to use safesites. They only need to have installed the “launcher” or whatever it will be called.

So indeed the user may not even know of this network called SAFE, just that they clicked on a link to install a program (same as say flash) to view some sites.

Thus I do see a need to allow safesites to be able to show content from both SAFE and the current internet.

1 Like

Hopefully not, surely this network has enough going for it without the need to pander to anyone’s laziness, lack of awareness, lack of care regarding their own privacy.

The idea is no servers within 10 years, so it’s up to organizations to see the writing on the wall and transition their users if they wish to stay in business…they are the one’s that need to play catch up and use internal resources to transition.

So make a native browser and you either use it or you don’t. Those that do use it, discover the awesome exclusive apps only available within, they will tell others and off you go.

You want to straddle…a foot in each camp…it’s a dilution…a compromise…a sign of uncertainity about your product.

Not providing for users who don’t behave, is rather arrogant - assuming that reality will necessarily play out the way you expect, is perhaps rather foolish. Flexibility is a strength not a weakness. As @neo suggested SAFE will likely cater for alsorts anyway, without much additional input being needed.

Mass adoption should be of interest to all of us and in that case being flexible is to our advantage. Expecting the user to come to us because they necessarily understand our niche, is a way to be niche… which obviously will be in certain people’s shortsighted interests, even if not truly in their longerterm ones.

1 Like
  • laziness
  • lack of awareness
  • lack of care regarding their own privacy

I would consider the above; human weakness and in no way associated with misbehavior.

Misbehavior is akin to inappropriate, which was not implied. An assertion of arrogance is therefore unwarranted.

The elimination of servers within 10 years is the stated goal of Maidsafe, I would not consider them foolish for having this goal. I would not consider myself foolish for believing this goal is possible and treating the journey towards this goal as one that indeed will happen.

Straddling the Clearnet for the sake of Mass Adoption by way of Familiar Social Interactions

So no, I do not believe having a bridge to the clearnet for the sake of mass adoption is a good idea.

The timeline for adoption has been clearly laid out by Maidsafe and I assume that timeline was made with a native implementation in mind.

For mass adoption I believe you need to attrract developers and businesses who will bring their customers/ users with them. An example of a company would be Dropbox… a service for data and written in RUST. An example of a developer group would be Docker who now have native orchestration built in and are a very much a disruptor.

SAFE has finite resources and mass marketing for mass adoption is a gamble too far from my perspective.