Big Opportunities in Alternatives to Big-Tech

[MJ DeMarco]

...in other words, alternative technology platforms that do not censors political views, wrong-think, and language that is potentially offensive.

I suggested this a few years ago, but it has recently reached a tipping point.

There's a large market out there who is DESPERATELY seeking alternatives to the technocrats who use their political righteousness to censor dissenting voices.

I still think a Twitter alternative is viable, not a big fan of Gab.

Likewise, Minds.com with their crypto angle is starting to gain traction. I just created an account there to see how it works and to see if there are any advertising angles. (The best advertising values usually come from grassroots upstarts, more so than legacy properties who are saturated with advertisers, hence bidding up costs.)

On the search engine front, I already use DuckDuckgo.

Also note that a lot of these places are like the "wild wild west" so it might take some time to adjust your settings and "mute" content that is offensive. In other words, you get to chose what is offensive, not some technocrat in San Francisco.

If I was young and just getting started, this is an angle that I'd be looking at.

It would not be easy, but the market IS THERE.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Captain_Picard]

Interesting topic. I was thinking of something like this that ties into crypto. There is a crypto called Oyster Pearl, it can come handy in a case like this. You can post any type of content on your site and it is also immune to ad blockers. It takes one line of code to incorporate. Also, the Javascript/Firefox inventor has one too called BAT.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

Another thread on the topic...

Fastlane - Social Media Censorship = Huge Business Opportunity?

 

[Raoul Duke]

I am still thinking about pursuing my INE that I purchased a while back.

https://www.thefastlaneforum.com/community/threads/childrens-network.77073/

This would be the first "real" business that I would attempt. Was kinda scared that I would fail. lol

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Brian Christel]

The level of bias on censorship has gotten out of hand and it's really a shame. You'd think the tech/social media giants, who constantly push for innovation/diversity/inclusion, would be above that but it opens the door for HUGE opportunity that would put the USER in control of what's in their feed.

 

[daru]

Cool. I'm working on this!
This and "own" your data. Read Future Crimes and Data and Goliath and got pissed off.

Recommendation for security/privacy: Signal messaging app

 

[Deleted50669]

Alright, I'll do it

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisR]

I've thought about this a lot over the last year and a half. The shit that's happening is outright insane.

The thing that worries me the most is the top companies controlling the internet. Look what happened to Alex Jones and Gab.ai. If the powers that be want you gone then there really isn't a whole lot that can be done about it.

 

[GoGetter24]

It doesn't work.

You have to remember why all these services are so popular, resulting in these companies having so much power.

The concept that the internet is a force for decentralization (or "democratization" as some say) has been so far proven completely false. It's been one of the greatest sources of centralization ever.

It's so conducive to centralization that "google" has become a verb for "search the internet". Facebook has penetrated the social landscape of any country who's government hasn't outright blocked them by force. Then on top of that governments have used it for dragnet surveillance of their own citizens on a scale never seen before.

So why don't people just use these alternatives? Because life's hard enough without deliberately hobbling yourself. Whenever anyone uses one of these alternative sources, they face the immediate problem of: "it's not as good". Then there are the network effects. Most people are on twitter. Most people are on facebook. If you go elsewhere you're missing the point.

What we should do is pay attention to the existing sources of decentralization we already have, without screwing around with "clever" new decentralization technology that nobody can relate to (like bitcoin & web 3.0).

Such as:
- Email (private, not webmail)
- Websites (case in point: forums like this one)
- Hyperlinks

Instead of the hub-and-spoke siloing of websites (being discovered from Google or not at all), there should be much more extensive interconnection between them. More hyperlinking, more joint ventures and alliances, more internal or "consortium" search.

The solution isn't another monolithic point of centralization. It's using what decentralization we already have and expanding upon it.

 

[Thomas Chauvet]

I am still thinking about pursuing my INE that I purchased a while back.

https://www.thefastlaneforum.com/community/threads/childrens-network.77073/

This would be the first "real" business that I would attempt. Was kinda scared that I would fail. lol

Sorry but what is an INE ? The link is dead (or may be for INSIDERS?)

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[BlackMagician]

Well, this is interesting. If someone can create a Galatic Dark Net with a legal perspective, than it would be mind blowing.

 

[Ayanle Farah]

I've checked minds.com and one of the frontpages seem full of fanpages for people such as Trump, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and Alex Jones, it appears to be a platform for mild opinions instead of actual truth.

 

[Timmy C]

I've checked minds.com and one of the frontpages seem full of fanpages for people such as Trump, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and Alex Jones, it appears to be a platform for mild opinions instead of actual truth.

Oh please that was never what was being discussed we are talking about censorship, the right to free speech regardless of opinion, free speech is a right and censorship is the issue.

The censorship itself is often to keep you from such truths as apart of an agenda.i am not saying that is the case with all the people you have listed. Although Jordan Peterson does make great points, about society now being a feminist society which is 100 percent accurate.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Timmy C]

Speak of feminist society hmmmm I think I smell a business idea.

 

[Ayanle Farah]

Oh please that was never what was being discussed we are talking about censorship, the right to free speech regardless of opinion, free speech is a right and censorship is the issue.

The censorship itself is often to keep you from such truths as apart of an agenda.i am not saying that is the case with all the people you have listed. Although Jordan Peterson does make great points, about society now being a feminist society which is 100 percent accurate.

Even if you're given an outlet to rant about a few topics, suggesting to you what you should think is still a form of censorship which is what the ones I've mentioned above are doing, the point is to not be a follower of anyone.

 

[Timmy C]

Even if you're given an outlet to rant about a few topics, suggesting to you what you should think is still a form of censorship which is what the ones I've mentioned above are doing, the point is to not be a follower of anyone.

The censorship of the individuals above is not about being given a place to rant but more to have a discussion about issues in society from both sides like a civilised society.

Bias is a tendency to lean in a certain direction, often to the detriment of an open mind. Those who are biased tend to believe what they want to believe, refusing to take into consideration the opinions of others.

A bias is happening on every single social platform from, youtube, to facebook and the list goes on. Why else would they be censoring individuals, the people speaking out and giving there opinion are not censoring they are being censored.

A corporation should not have the right to control the narrative being played all over the world at the moment media especially and the list goes on. A decentralized platform squashes this into oblivion.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Raoul Duke]

I've checked minds.com and one of the frontpages seem full of fanpages for people such as Trump, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and Alex Jones, it appears to be a platform for mild opinions instead of actual truth.

That is why, you will never be rich.

Before you respond with a rebuttal. Reread what you wrote.

 

[Ayanle Farah]

That is why, you will never be rich.

Before you respond with a rebuttal. Reread what you wrote.

My post is coming from a consumer mindset instead of a producer mindset(like MJ only checking how the site works and their advertising), it's a bad habit on my part, thanks. I gotta stop doing that, or did you mean something else?

 

[Timmy C]

My post is coming from a consumer mindset instead of a producer mindset(like MJ only checking how the site works and their advertising), it's a bad habit on my part, thanks. I gotta stop doing that, or did you mean something else?

Really gotta be careful what I say here. I can't the rabbit hole goes to deep you need to figure it out yourself. Once something traumatic happens to you, you might see the light.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Ayanle Farah]

Really gotta be careful what I say here. I can't the rabbit hole goes to deep you need to figure it out yourself. Once something traumatic happens to you, you might see the light.

I don't know what you're talking about and I hope whatever bad you're wishing on me goes back to you. I don't feel like talking to you anymore.

Put on ignore list.

 

[Timmy C]

I hope whatever bad you're wishing on me goes back to you. I don't feel like talking to you anymore.

Fair enough, I don't wish bad on anyone especially not you or anyone on this forum, we are all here working towards the same thing. The fact is warning people that the stove is hot is pointless we have to feel the burn. And I don't want the conversation to run off topic which is what would happen if I say anything, prefer to keep the eye on fastlane entrepreneurship only.

 

[Thomas Chauvet]

Fair enough, I don't wish bad on anyone especially not you or anyone on this forum, we are all here working towards the same thing. The fact is warning people that the stove is hot is pointless we have to feel the burn. And I don't want the conversation to run off topic which is what would happen if I say anything, prefer to keep the eye on fastlane entrepreneurship only.

May be you should say what you mean so that we all benefit from it.

Envoyé de mon SM-G955F en utilisant Tapatalk

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Timmy C]

I'll kindly decline as it is painful for people to hear and I don't feel like being controversial and ruining peoples realities, PM me if you want but i am not putting it out in the forum.

 

[ChrisR]

I've checked minds.com and one of the frontpages seem full of fanpages for people such as Trump, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and Alex Jones, it appears to be a platform for mild opinions instead of actual truth.

I think your statement proves how a great majority of people think.

I believe the existing sites are more than adequate for most people. They are totally content with the way companies like youtube and facebook operate. Those are the people that aren't being silenced.

It's the people that are being silenced that are going to create or find other outlets. These people are typically right leaning or conservative. When a new site pops up and it has a lot of what you mentioned, they automatically deem it as hate speech like they did with Gab.ai. They think it's a right wing outlet full of hate, bigots and xenophobs.

Idk how someone would successfully launch an unbiased platform.

 

[Timmy C]

I think your statement proves how a great majority of people think.

I believe the existing sites are more than adequate for most people. They are totally content with the way companies like youtube and facebook operate. Those are the people that aren't being silenced.

It's the people that are being silenced that are going to create or find other outlets. These people are typically right leaning or conservative. When a new site pops up and it has a lot of what you mentioned, they automatically deem it as hate speech like they did with Gab.ai. They think it's a right wing outlet full of hate, bigots and xenophobs.

Idk how someone would successfully launch an unbiased platform.

I agree. I have given people clues in my day to day life even my father.

He said I wasn't right and I said to pay attention, he came home the other day and said I thought you might be right but after what happened the other day when I was out for dinner I new you where 100 percent right and he was shocked. I left it there and didn't tell him anymore harsh truths because I could see the pain he was going through its best to leave breadcrumbs.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Hyrum]

So far there's been a lot of complaining about how the status quo is unfair, and very little actual analysis on if this is a viable business idea. And while I think the privacy-minded services (Duck-duck-go, Protonmail) have a lot of room to grow, the anti-censorship platforms (Gab, minds.com) will have a much harder time reaching a critical mass due to basic business math.

For starters, like @ChrisR said, the current platforms are more than adequate for the majority of people. So right off the bat, you're dealing with a business model that is for a niche audience. How big is that audience? Alex Jones has what, 2M followers across all platforms? How many more can you attract to your platform? I'm estimating a platform like this would appeal to 1 or 2% of the total population. Is that enough for your business plan?

Also, how is this project going to funded and make money? Advertising is pretty much out. Remember when Papa John's was nominated as the official pizza of the alt-right?

Papa John's is now the official alt-right pizza, according to neo-Nazis

How long did it take Papa John's to publicly denounce that endorsement? Big companies are very risk-averse when it comes to their brand being associated with non-mainstream populations, so you're stuck with advertisements for dick pills and porn sites. And even then, will you have a large enough audience to break even or make money?

And are you truly committed to a censorship-free platform? Are you ok with neo-nazis using your platform to threaten violence against others based on their skin color? Are you ok with "GamerGate" people threatening to rape and kill women? Are you fine with Antifa's using it to plan violent counter-protests? Are you ok with ISIS and Al-Qaeda using it to organize terror attacks? (I use these examples since they have all been associated with 4chan). I know MJ said that users could block offending content, but how many people are willing to put in the time to sanitize what they see? And wouldn't that just give the platform an enormous amount of information on the user, which is what we were trying to avoid in the first place?

I've thought a little bit about what it would take to create an alternative social media platform in the past, and these are a few of the questions I asked myself while doing my due diligence. In the end, I decided against it because:
1. There's little to no money
2. I didn't want to be associated with the fringe populations (right or left)

I'm not saying it's not possible, or my business assumptions are 100% accurate. Just that at the end of the day I can find better business opportunities that more closely align with my values.

 

[Timmy C]

So far there's been a lot of complaining about how the status quo is unfair, and very little actual analysis on if this is a viable business idea. And while I think the privacy-minded services (Duck-duck-go, Protonmail) have a lot of room to grow, the anti-censorship platforms (Gab, minds.com) will have a much harder time reaching a critical mass due to basic business math.

For starters, like @ChrisR said, the current platforms are more than adequate for the majority of people. So right off the bat, you're dealing with a business model that is for a niche audience. How big is that audience? Alex Jones has what, 2M followers across all platforms? How many more can you attract to your platform? I'm estimating a platform like this would appeal to 1 or 2% of the total population. Is that enough for your business plan?

Also, how is this project going to funded and make money? Advertising is pretty much out. Remember when Papa John's was nominated as the official pizza of the alt-right?

Papa John's is now the official alt-right pizza, according to neo-Nazis

How long did it take Papa John's to publicly denounce that endorsement? Big companies are very risk-averse when it comes to their brand being associated with non-mainstream populations, so you're stuck with advertisements for dick pills and porn sites. And even then, will you have a large enough audience to break even or make money?

And are you truly committed to a censorship-free platform? Are you ok with neo-nazis using your platform to threaten violence against others based on their skin color? Are you ok with "GamerGate" people threatening to rape and kill women? Are you fine with Antifa's using it to plan violent counter-protests? Are you ok with ISIS and Al-Qaeda using it to organize terror attacks? (I use these examples since they have all been associated with 4chan). I know MJ said that users could block offending content, but how many people are willing to put in the time to sanitize what they see? And wouldn't that just give the platform an enormous amount of information on the user, which is what we were trying to avoid in the first place?

I've thought a little bit about what it would take to create an alternative social media platform in the past, and these are a few of the questions I asked myself while doing my due diligence. In the end, I decided against it because:
1. There's little to no money
2. I didn't want to be associated with the fringe populations (right or left)

I'm not saying it's not possible, or my business assumptions are 100% accurate. Just that at the end of the day I can find better business opportunities that more closely align with my values.

in my opinion the tide is already turning but how quick it turns you can't be sure. This goes deeper than alt right alt left.
We say North Korea are force fed bullshit news that is controlled by government but it is of my opinion we are getting force fed a bunch of crap to that keeps society obedient l am not just speaking about fastlane and unscripted script speak. It goes much deeper.

the critical masses are buying into it at the moment but we at least have the means to uncover the truth if we dig deep enough into the shit storm and web of lies which some already have done. It is of my opinion when critical mass realise this there will be a major shit storm upon us and shift in public opinion.

In regards to ISIS etc we'll that will happen whether we like it or not and will be a direct consequence of the government's of the world pulling the wool over the masses eyes and corporations having control over free speech.

You make some good points for someone looking to persue this for a fastlane investment though.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

Sorry but what is an INE ? The link is dead (or may be for INSIDERS?)

Idea Needing Execution -- its a sub forum on the INSIDERS forum for ideas available for execution with discussions about them.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[TheOwl8]

Few things bother me more than tech monopolies in Seattle and San Fransicko lecturing us about tolerance, inclusion and diversity, while they actively censor, ban, and financially ruin any one who actually has a diverse opinion. It is pure hypocrisy.

Facebook and Google have self-appointed themselves as the judges of truth. Talk about power in the hands of a few.

I would love to see alternative free speech platforms gain traction, but these tech monopolies ARE monopolies. To the entrepreneur out there who wants to take them on, I salute you.

 

[Process]

Yes, if someone made a Bitchute that loaded reliably and had a good search engine, there'd be no reason to use YT anymore. Most of YT's core audience is very irritated.

Something smart Bitchute did was to make it so one's YT videos automatically upload onto Bitchute.