The Internet is About to Get A Lot Safer

Great write up. Would be good to see this on a few Reddit threads.


I posted to r/SAFEnetwork :blush:


Brilliant pitch. Nailed all the keys. Hook is totally on point with the curiosity factor. 10/10


@Sotros25 just a question and deferring to your marketing expertise. Is it worthwhile pointing out that the network is not blockchain based?


Nor a crypto project/coin/token.

1 Like

Really good point. Is much better than blockchain.

Yes not being blockchain-based is good, not just because of every reason possible, but also since you don’t need to sell a collective arm and a leg as part of short-circuiting the world’s supply of silicon for GPU chips and causing a disastrous world shortage. Bitcoin is a disaster.


Not sure where someone has said the safe network was going to replace the internet, so unsure what your point is exactly and where it came from. The original post says the internet is going to get a whole lot safer and that the existing internet will be upgraded, nothing about replacement. Yet it seems like thats a narrative you’re trying to create discussion around. Why, what is your point? Do you have any suggestions on how the wording of the article could be improved, because that be very helpful?


This is true and these are good points!
Just a couple of weeks ago I proposed an implementation of more or less exactly this feature to the team.
I would say that everything is there to get a very basic version of it in a testnet iteration soon, should we want to.


It’s good to get constructive critiques @jbash and it’s even better that they can be resolved when they are prudent, @oetyng!

Not sure how relevant it is but making WebRTC easy would be nice. I’d like to see something like JackTrip be easy and sensible on Safe Network. In a post COVID world this real time stuff will be important, especially if Safe intends to replace the internet.

Just to harp on JackTrip for a second. They are open source and have finally gained traction (because of the pandemic lockdowns) and now have dedicated hardware (awesome!) but also “cloud audio servers” and because of these things they have to charge. I personally think they could eventually benefit from Safe Network by lowering infrastructure costs and some of the setup, making it more affordable/accessible for musicians. I’d love to reach out to them someday or somehow integrate it. Great project.

1 Like

And using as much power as the entire country of Sweden to mine and run the blockchain.


Regardless, you seem keen to minimise the achievements, without any real reason. The technology is clearly pushing many boundaries, yet you seem more interested in poking holes in a layman’s statement of what it does.

This is a problematic take. If someone points out flawed and potentially dishonest communication, that should be taken seriously and rectified. If the layman’s statement isn’t factually correct, then it should be corrected to avoid problems down the line.

To dismiss these critiques as “minimising achievements” is to deflect from the important issues of clarity and honesty, and honestly comes across as defensive.

For the most part, the project has taken care to use the right words when describing components of the network, changing them whenever necessary for the greater long-term good. That same principle should apply to the mottos used.

1 Like

When someone criticises without offering constructive advise on how to improve something, it can appear as FUD. When someone posts for the first time in 7 months, just to do this, it has my spider sense tingling.

By all means, suggest a better way to frame what the safe network is. I thought it seemed like a pretty decent summary for anyone who is wondering what it is.

I’m certain the marketing team would welcome your input though, if you have something more pithy and understandable for the layman. The primer and the new documentation being put together go into much more details about what it is or isn’t too.


To the layman, internet and www are synonymous. The details you point out are mentioned in the primer with regard to osi layers. For anyone who was able to test out the alpha 2 network it is obvious that safe can replace the www.


I went back and forth on whether to be explicit about that point, but ultimately I think it’s worth calling this out. It seems many people in the DLT space seem to have a practically religious preoccupation with blockchain and dismiss out of hand the notion that “not blockchain” is actually—particularly in the case of a decentralized internet and/or dApp platform—a superior and necessary approach. I think it’s effort justification, TBH. While “not blockchain” in and of itself may not be compelling to some acquainted with the space, it could very well appeal to the many who don’t buy anything DLT-related as practical.

In short, I’ve added the following and thanks for the suggestion:


You could also mention energy efficiency as this is the first issue for many outside the space?


Why not “superior to blockchain”, or something like that? it is after all more than just “not” it :slight_smile:


Yes, it’s already there:

Especially without hard evidence, it would likely be perceived as abrasive, alienating, and more likely to put people on the defensive rather than open to new information because:

Sticking to facts would be less confrontational. Once a working product launches, laying out the stats should speak for itself: TPS, time to finality, energy consumption, etc.


I accept that “sustainable” suggests “energy efficiency”, but it is such a Blockchain beating feature which many people care about, I’m not sure that word is making the most of it.


“Beyond blockchain”, perhaps…?