Expect this study to be used to smear Tor and the “Dark Web”, despite it addressing only 2% of Tor’s traffic, and it being unable to distinguish law enforcement, child protection monitoring, and DDoS attacks from traffic viewing paedophile material.
Precisely measuring anything on the Dark Web isn’t easy, and the study’s findings leave some room for dispute.
So let’s study our own network and address issues ourselves,
If SAFE Network is being marketed and if the network is in fact being only used for porn of kids, then an activist should present evidence why this is not good for the person and the people;
Those who harass a network with unproductive for the soul, and for the people material ought to learn about how kid porn will ruin such a spectators abilities in social settings and create a depravity that is unfulfillable because young children are not designed for sex, and therefore that person watching this stuff is degrading their own mind further.
An activist should influence the habits that are indecent to individuals and masses a like, and likely an unstoppable network will have such a person come up if the people or a group of people were to fall out of line with their own evolution.
Agreed, and there are many other ways that this needs to be addressed if it is to be successful. General pornography is another example where people harm themselves through consumption and involvement, drugs another etc. Prohibition has never worked. We have to show that it is actually better to do other things, and make this accessible to those who haven’t learned this.
But instead, politicians and vested interests engage in emotional manipulation. Or sometimes it is a simple failure to comprehend the roots of a problem which leads to simplistic reactions, attacking symptoms rather than causes, and ultimately more harm than good.
Education against pornography (and whatever it was called before) has been going on for 2014 years now and it’s still a nice little business.
Regarding fear-mongering articles on pedophilia and such: does anyone actually read that stuff?
Most of that content is below the level of North Korean press releases (no offense to Mr. Kim).
On the list of priorities and concerns of the average person, that must be in the bottom 5% together with certain environment-related scares (see http://data.myworld2015.org/).
“Education” about pornography is severely flawed. Can anyone tell me why porn isn’t good for you? And even if you know, have you found the way to realise that for yourself, to not even want to look at porn, to not be tempted, even in moments of weakness? There is much to do and I don’t think much of it looks like current “education”. There’s a need for a much broader approach to support healthy psychological development. Information is one part only.
While few actually read it, many consume the headlines and soundbytes and either trust “authority” (MSM, politicians, police chiefs etc.) or shrug and let it pass regardless. Not many think for themselves. Fewer speak out or act. Its part of the trance. Even previously silent & secret NSA/GCHQ heads are now chiming in and taking advantage of this sheepism.
I said this would happen from the beginning. People I guess didn’t take it seriously but this will be how frightened authorities will suppress SAFE Network.
They will make it seem like the only reason people use it is for child porn. The stigma could then become so strong that people will avoid using anything resembling SAFE Network even if it’s in their rational self interest to use it.
SAFE Network probably does need to attract responsible people to it and build the sort of filters at the application layer so that people can see that it can do more than just enable child pornographers. Marketing has to show that SAFE Network can enable far more good in the world than bad and this requires visionaries on the marketing team who can do what Ray Kurzweil does and look to the future. Get some transhumanists on the team.
I’m someone capable of seeing that in the future something like SAFE Network could be indispensable because of the Internet of Things. I think a lot of technologists can see that the Internet of Things is one of the real reasons we need something like this but not enough marketing of those future use scenarios of SAFE Network are being presented.
SAFE Network will be judged unfortunately or fortunately by the quality of it’s early adopters. Marketing will have to highlight the positive use cases instead of the controversial or “evil” use cases.
This in my opinion means it shouldn’t be marketed as anti-government or pro-government. It should be marketed as a better Internet for life in the future where everything is connected.
Instead of being on the defense go on the offensive. Show the world as it would look if there isn’t anything like SAFE Network and start from there in comparison. Let people see the ultimate logical conclusion of both paths without expecting people to have a Phd.
If people don’t paint the opposite picture people cannot be more afraid of the future without SAFE Network than they are of the future with SAFE Network. The future without SAFE Network might actually be far more scary to technologists but it’s not more scary to people who don’t really understand technology.
The majority of people cannot see whats coming with robotics, automation, brain to computer interface, Internet of Things, wearable computing, etc. Show them the future of that where hackers can hack into their refrigerator or perhaps even the chips inside their bodies should we reach that point.
Not with suggestions like this…
I should have said “futurists”. But the point remains the same that you need some people who can present SAFE Network to transhumanists and futurists.
A lot more people know what the singularity is but not many people know where SAFE Network fits into that. There isn’t enough marketing with specific future scenarios in mind.
The only way in my opinion to counter paedophilia scare tactics is to present future scenarios which are more scary. So why not present those scenarios of what could happen if SAFE Network fails or doesn’t exist?
If you don’t define what success is, why it is important or critical, and what the stakes actually are, then people will see “SAFE Network” and “Paedophilia” in the same sentences. Once those two concepts are subconsciously associated all reasoning shuts off.
It’s also a fact that certain people’s brains are more able to respond to fear. If you don’t have something they fear or some insecurity which is more scary than paedophilia then it’s already lost.
My advice and you’re free to not listen is below:
Show how SAFE Network could be used to save the world by telling story examples of scenarios where SAFE Network is used to deal with existential risks/global catastrophic risk.
Show how hackers can totally exploit the IoT with examples which highlight the danger of not having SAFE Network. People need to associate SAFE Network with an increase in security, people want to see how it can save lives and protect people. So far if you go to the website you don’t see very much about how SAFE Network can be used to reduce global catastrophic risk but since these are the people you want to attract to use SAFE Network you have to show that.
Present a crossroad where people can potentially lose all human rights and autonomy due to technology or where technology can defend human rights and autonomy. It’s not a situation where if you don’t build SAFE Network that the dangerous people won’t exploit the fact that nothing like SAFE Network exists. Ultimately the marketing material must show the media with clear examples how SAFE Network protects us from dangerous people.
Create a press kit or some material which gives these examples. Maybe some testimonials or just some clear examples of projects people are working on which reveal the utility of SAFE Network.
Tor isn’t very popular because not many people see utility in using it. Freenet existed before SAFE Network and wasn’t very popular because people couldn’t see the utility of using that. Why is SAFE Network going to be different unless it’s utility is marketed from the start to the masses and not to just the crypto-anarchists?
Where indeed does the SAFE network fit into a ‘singularity’?
Not a believer in singularity myself.
Even if you’re not a believer in it a lot of people are. The sort of people who believe in it are the sort of people who you’d want to market SAFE Network to.
SAFE Network in the context of a singularity? SAFE Network could be what triggers a singularity.
Imagine we as humans are determined to develop a super intelligence machine or global brain? Imagine we have options such as to develop it in a centralized corporation running closed source software or we could develop it as open source software running on something like SAFE Network?
People who believe in the singularity will be able to tell you exactly where it fits into their world view but it is these sorts of people who care about the future and who think about the singularity that can be early adopters. If a superintellligent machine is going to be built perhaps the marketing should propose questions like whether or not it should be decentralized? Who should own the superintelligent machine? And if everything may someday connect to it somehow then how could those communications be private?
I think if you propose the questions in the right way people will reach their own logical conclusions just like I did.
I watch porn and do drugs…
That should be the choice of every human being. Unfortunately, we have a culture where the state assumes the role of moral guardian - as Nanny to keep the naughty children disciplined.
It is very odd when you think about it. It is as if religious figures have been replaced by bureaucrats. One day, people will realise that they own themselves and their actions…
Edit: btw, I am not condoning paedophilia in any way - it is sourced from child abuse. This was specifically in reply the message above.
While I agree with you that persuasion should be used instead of coersion isn’t this like arguing the immorality of porn? Or of premarital sex for that matter. Paedophiles are the new sexual heretics just as homosexuals were before them. The state needs someone to demonize. If not paedophiles it would be some other kink. I’m guessing the next one will be sex with robots, clones or bioengineered sex slaves or something. When will we learn prohibition doesn’t work.
I think we have a large base of fans, devs, engineers, marketers …ready made and their called the Bitcoin community.
Bitcoin has attracted a diverse array of people, that are probably attracted in part by what they understand as decentralization and anonymity. Of course these things are very debatable once you grasp the blockchain as a public record, suited for example to keeping public servants in check.
The trigger would be to let them know, loud and proud, that Bitcoin is probably not want they think it is when viewed in the light of Maidsafe.
Maidsafe’s technology basically does everything, that these blockchain companies are scrambling to achieve by default…but there’s so much more. Getting paid by the network is the killer app in my mind.
So yes, I believe if you want to market to futurists…the true futurist’s are resident within the Bitcoin community and if you wanted to get people on the team, I would target from this community. These guys believe they’ve seen the future, but they haven’t had the Maidsafe light-bulb moment yet.
Oh dear…what absolutely disgusting and homo -phobic reasoning.
Homo-sexuality is practiced between consenting adults, sexual acts with children are not - the children need protecting - hence the difference. You are equating the two, which is both ignorant and wrong.
By the way, being a paedophile is only an offence when urges are acted upon.
And…it is the state acting on prevalent homo-phobic religious objections within society in regard to homo-sexuality. As religion fades away, so does the ignorance. Interestingly, it would appear Mohammed was likely a paedophile as he was married to an 8 or 9 year old wife -Aisha I think…So, supported by at least one mono-theistic religion. This in fact is why the current age of consent in Iran is 9 - because followers try to live like the “perfect man” Mohammed. Sick…
I think the Bitcoin community is exactly what we need to get away from. The Bitcoin community has a reputation which is clearly bad. Look up the most recent poll data explaining why most people aren’t using Bitcoin and it’s because Bitcoin is associated with Silk Road, the Dark Net, hackers, and Wikileaks.
It might be that you agree with the Bitcoin community but most don’t and probably never will. So if you rely on the Bitcoin community for marketing then the fate of Madesafe/SAFE Network is forever going to be paired with the fate of Bitcoin. I think from a strategic point of view it’s better to separate from Bitcoin but that is just my opinion.
I don’t think Bitcoin the brand is going to be viewed in a positive light. I think in the long term the blockchain technology will be what is viewed as the breakthrough while Bitcoin the brand will suffer a similar fate as Freenet, Tor, etc.
People think Bitcoin is basically for criminals, hackers, terrorists, pedophiles, etc. Whether or not this is true is irrelevant because the media will use whatever people fear to get them to obey. Fear motivates a lot of behaviors and ultimately with Bitcoin not a lot of people fear their governments enough to take Bitcoin seriously like their marketing plan hopes.
I think SAFE Network needs to work with people who aren’t the same faces people see associated with Bitcoin. If people search Google for Maidsafe and they see the same exact people associated with it that they see with Bitcoin they’ll think SAFE Network is just part of Bitcoin. If they don’t like Bitcoin now what makes you think they’ll appreciate it next year?
I think with Bitcoin it gains because people want to make money off of it. People don’t agree with it’s politics or the philosophy behind it but they know if you buy a stock low and sell it high you can make money. People set their politics aside to make some money and then later on discover that Bitcoin might be useful for something else.
SAFE Network in my opinion wont get very far marketing itself on politics or philosophy. Most people make their decisions when they are afraid of something whether it be missing the next Bitcoin price bubble or of hackers getting their records. In order for SAFE Network to market itself it has to show everyone (not just Bitcoiners) that the world would be a better place with SAFE Network in it.
I do think it’s important to keep your base of Bitcoin supporters but I don’t think Bitcoin supporters will be key to the success of Maidsafe. I think the key to the success of Maidsafe is to show people glimpses of the future without anything like Maidsafe in it so people can be frightened of that and see that only a secure, distributed, private space is a way to prevent the nightmare. People have to be able to see themselves using Maidsafe in an era of an Internet of Things and must be made to understand how unsafe an Internet of Things could be for them if the hackers win.
The SAFE network need to be presented to companies working on the “Internet Of Things”. I’ve said it before, but if you promote Maidsafe as “The Internet For The Internet Of Things”, your sending out a real powerful message. We should get it at an stage that products appear on the market saying “Powered By Maidsafe”.
Powered By Maidsafe means:
- My appliance is on a SAFE network
- I’m making money with my fridge/tv or what have you
Now think about that, whoever made money with their fridge running on the internet?
Maybe we should have a list of events that wouldn’t happen if they were running on the SAFE network. I like to rub it in for people when they practice unsafe…
Wow amazing we had the KILLER APP in front of us all the time, some of us/me just didn’t see it.
I’m talking about the individuals that are in the Bitcoin space, which could also equally apply to the Tor space or any other group that is seeking decentralization, privacy, anonymity etc…
Futurists, Transhumanists, AI advocats, etc, etc …do they seek the same outcomes? They seem to me to be talking to the 1%…and want to define the next Status quo
Dont get me wrong, certain blockchain leaders are very obviously in the same camp…and indeed the blockchain is possibly an ideal way to deliver the next staus quo…for the objectives of all these above mentioned groups.
People are important, not the platform…I have expressed my opinion on the possible outcome with a blockchain/ triple entry accounting world here before and they’re not glowing, because they concentrate on the tyrannical possibilities…nothing to do with anonymity (and all the bad stuff)…because there is none in the blockchain…no matter what these ‘Dark’ devs declare.
What I am suggesting here, is that the Bitcoin phenomenon, has brought into the fold a variety of talented people that otherwise may have been heading down a different fork in the technology road.
These talented people (with some digestible SAFE education, like the Montreal SafePod is providing) could quite readily convert into building out the SAFE network, instead of their existent projects. These are the people I would be keen to see come over.
ProjectSAFE, right now without the Bitcoin phenomenon…a much harder sell to the talent.
ProjectSAFE, right now without the NSA…a much harder sell to the uninformed masses.
I’d reckon ProjectSAFE has had a couple of free kicks, it would have been a lot less savvy talent and a complacent Public.
Apologies for the bold, but many points to convey from my side.
haha… yeah “I gotsa get paid”
‘The Reverend’ Billy Gibbons predicted it
EDIT: and really when you boil it all down, ProjectSAFE is the killer app. After all it’s only an app running on your computer.
Thats boggles my brain… Let the futurists that thrive on complexity, chew on that one