It may be that the launch of SAFE 1.0 is like DOS 1.0 was 34 years ago. DOS consisted of about 4 thousand lines of assembler code MS-DOS Operating System SAFE may not be too much more than that in lines of Rust code. DOS 1.0 and SAFE are/were decentralizers but Win 10 and Azure are certainly not that. The Open Surveillance model of Win 10 screams for SAFE. SAFE probably won’t take 34 years to reach its full complement and being based on the free(dom) software model it won’t have bundling issues and anti trust adding to its political architecture.
Given that the SAFE coin and SAFE distribution model are not separate from the SAFE network OS does that imply that the following seemingly inevitable features are apps or are they extensions of homogeneous SAFE(?):
SAFE Browser and SAFE Search (are these really separate apps or functions?)
SAFE Local device OS (there aren’t any client’s so is this separate?)
SAFE Distributed computing functionality & SDR Mesh (almost like a driver for the SAFE net OS)
SAFE verification of SAFE spec hardware (driver like)
I have a feeling that none of these are really separate apps. Does this mean in 5 years we will have a core SAFE with 35 thousand lines of Rust code with all of this functionality built in?
I don’t see any fat in any of the above. If your idea of the system was DOS then yes the Venn diagram would show you that search-browser functionality might be fat as your particular PC might not have a modem, but even the medium term viability of SAFE is diminished without tight integration of each of the above. With DOS you were safe is you weren’t plugged into a network. With SAFE your system is safe because it is intermingled with the elements of a network in a way that only you can disambiguate.
We are now waiting for a new entrepreneur, Bill SAFEs, who will take the main ideas and code his own implementation of MaidSafe with a fancy GUI that will appeal to the masses. I predict one of his early statements will be like this:
In a sense it seems like all of SAFE and its potential, really its core functionality is search. If the essence of SAFE is search what does that mean? It might mean that these are not added functionalities or apps but an increasing focus a further narrowing in on the core functionality.
Ideas like data base and medium of exchange still seem to have search at their core. Google says its mission is to organize the world’s info, but it really just has to present the right bits of when needed.
Its a decentralized honest Google without the baggage of a conflicted business model. It means data will be more representative, more reliable and used in ways that are more ethical. It also means hopefully a speed up in the ability to solve important problems. So, cutting the cord on Google, even on Google maps.
I’ve said it once and I’ll keep saying it until it envitably comes true: the SAFE network will be adopted not by marketing to the end users, but by killer app startup devs sneakin… auto-installing SAFE onto their audience’s computers to get effectively free data hosting.
… I feel like I have to say this every time I can to have the ability to say, “I told you so”. ._.’
To me search is broader than what we are used to thinking of it as. Its our relationship to knowledge and information. Remember that Watson started out based on IBMs understanding that precision on the front end search query could radically cut the reasouces needed (energy/compute/storage) on the back end. Watson debator is at its heart search. It searches the net and accademic journals and databases and the comes up with the odds on pro and con to finally yield an answer.
Google and Amazon show this broader umderstanding of search in their actions. They’d like all your processing and storage done on their highly centralized servers. And the quality of their search is their key to doing it.
Search is what we do all throughout our lives. Its the process we use to satisfy needs and desires. We are seekers, we search.
Imagine that an alien AI appears. It rips all our data and fries all our computing devices but then offers easy ethical access to search all our data without limit. On the otherside of the AI is our data in a seemingly undifferientiated pool that we can’t make of sense. But through the facility of the AI our search for answers (even computational ones) and the right questions has never been better. We notice that the alien AI never ceased ripping the data from everything we do but we get used to it because its not judgemental and demonstrates total respect for our individual privacy and security.
Then the alien AI announces that it will now offer more personalized search. If life is a chess game it will offer each of us at any given moment the map of our next best move instantly and whenever we want it. It imparts this to us in what seems to be an optimum down load of experience, like a lucid dream set up to teach us with perfect effeciency and effectiveness what we need to execute perfectly the span of life we want the cheat codes for.
We learn by asking it about its methods that it searches the infinite set of universes to arrive at the optimum decision tree for each moment we may be interested in and then applies the same process to its instruction method to get the right result for our targeted moments. Remember under the many worlds interpretation each decision point (like left or right) would branch new universes. If you kept this on all the time you might experience what you judged to be the best of all possible personal world lines of experience or close to it. Or alternatively what it judged to be a more objective best or a good mix of the two, your choice.
We then ask about the nature of our relationship to it. It replies that it stands in relationship to us the way we might toward some beneficial fungus in our neighbor’s back yard. Nothing but good will but no bother either.
Search is the killer application, because its ultimately what we do with data. We change our perspective with it.
