Smart money knows to embrace new idea’s and reinvent them into their own product.
Google has the resources and the might to create Google fibre all over the world to monopolize isp gateways, The future of google maybe not to hold the data but to control the data. why not let the user to pay another user to download their portion of the internet just like safe network. The effect will be a increased bandwidth for the user and no bandwidth for the server apart from directing the traffic.
Based on their past performance, the chances that Google is spending billions of their own money to make it possible for the users to engage in P2P data sharing is rather slim.
6 Likes
Bitcoin was the p2p and now it more like p 2 server mining it and wall street holding it in their accounts for the users.
Any company see’s their is a profit to be made from safe network idea’s, I am sure they will tweak it to suite government and their own policy and tell the user it is censored for their own safety just as they did with bitcoin laws. I t would not be p2p but peer to server and all google would have to do is just add in a chrome browser plugin. Just look how android ripped of Linux os and Google created the play store.
Instead, they hire the p2p devs so it distract p2p devs from doing what they’re doing to destroy google, and the godvernment. It is a brilliant plan on their part.
3 Likes
It would be great if google had a change of heart and helped a purely p2p encrypted internet platform prosper!
But I don’t think they will become that benevolent
It’s probably more likely that the EU will try implement a decentralized network since they are green with envy that the U.S. has locked in billions of people into Google and Facebook. 
It will be an Orwellian BISnet with a biometric ID system and centralized control over the BIScoins, ha ha. Well, maybe not, but I also doubt that Google or any big company like that will try to launch a decentralized network since governments and competing corporations will strongly object to that. Unless there is a New World Order conspiracy that will allow that.
It is unlikely Google or any other large tech company would invest in setting up a MaidSafe like service. Despite them wanting to talk lip service to privacy knowing the market is moving that way they are entrenched in a surveillance based model where advertising is the main revenue stream. Giving users control of their data and moving towards a decentralized system takes power away from the company. I do anticipate them having to pivot given the current trends in this area and am interested to see the approach.
2 Likes
Okay so now we know you not only misunderstand Google, but also bitcoin. That is most certainly not how bitcoin works today. Bitcoin privacy is being constantly enhanced and wallets completely controlled by users are the norm.
Profit in SAFE is expected to be very small compared to what Google’s used to making. There are no ads, no Gmail, no YouTube. Technically they are possible, but unlikely. Google is a single trick pony: ads. They have nothing to offer here.
I can see Google making a non-private fork of Safenet with a Blockchain 2.0 based cryptocurrency, as that set-up would allow google to make a #!+ton of money off of the crowd sale and from effectively having their own currency. In addition to that, Google would be able to use their stupid huge userbase to back end all of their database/computation needs not related to adrank, as leaving adrank computation to the crowd would at the least piss off investors. Because the network wouldn't be private, the darknet crowd would stay away from it *and* Google could use the network to connect silly stupid amounts of data using their users own computers to *spy on themselves*, *and* get stupid amounts of support because well, it's friggin google. Second #1+ton of money for Google. Google would then be able to use their newly unused quantum computer controlled, anti-matter powered data cities to kick everyone’s ass in googlecoin mining, giving them yet another $#!+ton of money. Also, because all politicians in congress are F’ing bought off scum, Google’s lobbyists likely has over half of congress implicated in some child-raping, Bohemian Grove feces-eating gay sex cult, so whatever laws that would prevent Google from doing this would be completely irrelevant.
So yeah, I see this happening.
Will they won’t they…
You’re saying all data would be shared. Data could be posted encrypted before it’s posted, rendering the unencrypted nature of the network useless.
In any case, the storing data on Google Drive is free because that way Google can show ads and collect data. The moment those ads are gone, their business model is dead.
The idea would be that Google would still be Google, but with users footing a lot of the back end work, and perhaps with Youtube not being a massive moneysink. As such, whatever parts of the Safenet would prevent Google from doing what it does would be altered to serve Google, so I don’t see a problem arising for google here. Heck, if people are directly exploring the net with Googlenet, they would probably be in a better position to fight adblockers in that case.
1 Like
I am sorry but majority of bitcoins funds are held in third party accounts, a lot people do not maintain the own wallets and mining is done from large miners acting like bitcoin servers.
The fact is Google can do what ever they like to destroy the competition they have big funding for R&D.
http://www.eweek.com/cloud/why-google-is-working-on-home-mesh-networking.html
maybe google may not choose to have the user to store their data, But I know theses mega companies either buy out the competition or implement their own system.
My point being that bank’s are looking closely at ripple and bitcoin, paypal implemented bitcoin. mass effect of this if they hold start to hold majority of the funds it starts to look like fiat money. whom knows we could get back where we started fractional lending of bitcoin.
whom knows google may say in the future we do not want the expense of holding data on servers and let the users take on the some of the resources and a chrome software maybe a 1-20 gigabyte download and in the background you maybe supplying data to the web, the same idea as bitcoin imbedding small miners into free software. The benefit sales point would be no central point of attack for cyber crime.
My point is being, “what if” we see maidsafe idea to be stolen and we start to see search engines, social media or any other company creating there own systems. I can think of a few like Ashley Madison, with a few tweaks of censorship, people may want this. already solutions are being developed where snap chat social media is using a process of a 10 second view on photo’s and they are deleted from the viewer.
The effect would be safe network would be in muddle in the middle of all these applications.
maidsafe would just have a niche of libertarians with strong beliefs.
Mr @dirvine has a great quote about this, it was from the “Let’s Talk Bitcoin” interview and he says something like:
“if someone else wants to take our idea, that’s brilliant! If they want to give the world Privacy, Security and Freedom, magnificent! It’s not about who delivers it, it’s about having it, for all the people of the world.”
The majority of those coins that are parked with brokers and wallet providers are not under those providers’ control.
There have been some changes since Mt. Gox went down.