The Entrepreneur Forum | Financial Freedom | Starting a Business | Motivation | Money | Success

Welcome to the only entrepreneur forum dedicated to building life-changing wealth.

Build a Fastlane business. Earn real financial freedom. Join free.

Join over 80,000 entrepreneurs who have rejected the paradigm of mediocrity and said "NO!" to underpaid jobs, ascetic frugality, and suffocating savings rituals— learn how to build a Fastlane business that pays both freedom and lifestyle affluence.

Free registration at the forum removes this block.

Big Opportunities in Alternatives to Big-Tech

marklov

It is a Tiger That Devours Me but I am The Tiger
Read Fastlane!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
167%
Mar 30, 2014
404
676
I believe the big opportunities are...

Facebook problem being, college kids post their debauchery then show up in their parents or some other "old" person's feed.


What's so intimidating about these big tech companies?

Remember it's advertisers that are keeping facebook alive, they are really just a good one trick pony surviving off a massive database.


Are these tech companies really that infallible or is it just millenials don't have the drive to execute like a motherfcker?.

These tech companies were never the first of their kind to enter their market....won't be the last either.

Build a chump change Amazon store or...
slaying a giant and make billions becoming the better Google or Facebook ?


Maybe I just think TOO BIG but going after one of these big tech monopolies should be the real endgame, Amazon FBA chump change can kma.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Xavier X

Gold Contributor
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
261%
Jan 1, 2016
474
1,235
These United States
@marklov What you're not taking into account is that growth is directly proportional to the need for regulation.

When a platform starts out small and "owes no one anything," it's easy to accommodate "things" and be a rebel for the cause.
However, when you're a behemoth company that can't exist without structured income, the rules change.
When you're a behemoth company wide open to constant 9-digit fines and litigation, the rules change.

While I am all for options rather than monopolies, in practice it is a vicious cycle that goes something like:

Underdog breaks away from the evil Big Dog to start its own "unrestricted" thing.
People love a good underdog, so they tag along.
Underdog's platform is going great - Utopia at last!
Underdog grows
Underdog grows
Underdog grows even more.
User logs into Underdog's platform one fine morning.
Underdog is the evil Big Dog.

Rinse/Repeat.
 
Last edited:

ShadyDave

New Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
58%
Dec 5, 2017
12
7
24
Alamosa
I was thinking about this all morning long before I found this post. These companies suppressing free speech is a real problem especially considering that in this age of technology I think most people decide their political views based on social media. I honestly believe that any censorship of any kind is bad except for under very specific circumstances.

(Such as people creating videos of real people getting killed to gain attention)

I believe though that the censorship of anything else is wrong. I only believe in the censorship of criminal acts because it would ( temporarily) increase criminal activity as a whole. Censorship hurts us all.
 

chimichangatime

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
178%
Mar 1, 2018
32
57
50
sacramento, ca
Just because Facebook, Google, et al, restrict speech on their platforms doesn't mean it's "censorship" in the way this thread is talking about it. The First Amendment says the government shall not abridge the right to free speech. Private companies are private companies - they have every right to restrict what's on their platform. They can and SHOULD. Hell, even MJ has stripped out all content from at least one user on this forum and quashed any threads looking to find out what happened. Is MJ evil for having his platform his way? Is he part of some underground media control cabal hell-bent on controlling what you get to see in order to brainwash you into being an easily controlled minion? No. It's his right. And it's no different than X company blocking Y person for acting in a way contrary to their mission/values.

Is there a business opportunity? Maybe. It's worth investigating if you've got an enhancement idea that fixes/upgrades some annoying feature of another community. Might be better to make add-ons to existing tech. There are Gmail add-ons for browsers that add functionality to Gmail, for example. Just don't rely on Google or Firefox or Chrome or whatever - go cross-platform, cross-solution so you're not in the toilet when Google changes their interface without notice.

But, making your own platform? Probably not worth it.

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?

...

2. I didn't want to be associated with the fringe populations (right or left)

Yes, exactly.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

ryanbleau

Silver Contributor
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
224%
Jun 22, 2014
284
637
41
Scottsdale , Az
I'm friends with the infogalactic guys. They also have a Infogalactic news page that rivals Drudge report. Also Men of The West. A couple more pages as well that do quite well.
 

ShadyDave

New Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
58%
Dec 5, 2017
12
7
24
Alamosa
Just because Facebook, Google, et al, restrict speech on their platforms doesn't mean it's "censorship" in the way this thread is talking about it. The First Amendment says the government shall not abridge the right to free speech. Private companies are private companies - they have every right to restrict what's on their platform. They can and SHOULD. Hell, even MJ has stripped out all content from at least one user on this forum and quashed any threads looking to find out what happened. Is MJ evil for having his platform his way? Is he part of some underground media control cabal hell-bent on controlling what you get to see in order to brainwash you into being an easily controlled minion? No. It's his right. And it's no different than X company blocking Y person for acting in a way contrary to their mission/values.

Is there a business opportunity? Maybe. It's worth investigating if you've got an enhancement idea that fixes/upgrades some annoying feature of another community. Might be better to make add-ons to existing tech. There are Gmail add-ons for browsers that add functionality to Gmail, for example. Just don't rely on Google or Firefox or Chrome or whatever - go cross-platform, cross-solution so you're not in the toilet when Google changes their interface without notice.

But, making your own platform? Probably not worth it.



Yes, exactly.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I get where you are coming at, but I still have to disagree. First of all I know exactly what I was referring to when I talked about the censorship. Large companies can censor stuff too, not just the government. It is still censorship regardless of who does the censoring. Second, MJ and his forum aren't the same case at all. The forum has a theme, a smaller user base, and anything censored has a real reason to be. If someone comes here and constantly posts off topic and offensive content of course they are banned. The problem with these larger companies banning certain speech is that they are topic less large platforms that are one of the main sources of information (credible or not) available. They are platforms built for others to express opinions, so the suppression of certain opinions is exactly the kind of censorship that is wrong.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

chimichangatime

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
178%
Mar 1, 2018
32
57
50
sacramento, ca
Large companies can censor stuff too, not just the government.
Yes, but it's not a "freedom of speech" or First Amendment issue at this point. These are separate issues. Freedom of speech doesn't apply from Facebook, et al, because they can censor whatever they want.
Second, MJ and his forum aren't the same case at all. The forum has a theme, a smaller user base, and anything censored has a real reason to be.
This is patently ridiculous, and a logical fallacy.

The problem with these larger companies banning certain speech is that they are topic less large platforms that are one of the main sources of information (credible or not) available.
So... /r/ketogains is a pretty small group and not topic-less. In fact, Reddit has been accused of censoring (it's true, they have; they're privately owned!) but doesn't fall under your definition, though they'll certainly delete your posts if you go in there ranting about how they're gonna die if they don't eat more carbs.

the suppression of certain opinions is exactly the kind of censorship that is wrong.
"Certain opinions?" What does that mean? Who's the arbiter of that? And what does "wrong" mean? Who are you to tell anyone else what's "wrong?"

Can I join your Underwater Basket Weaving course you sell and then just be a straight-up dick to everyone there without consequence? Can I make death threats and scare everyone off? No, you'd kick my a$$ off. And you'd be right to, especially if you owned the platform.
 

Not_That_MD

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
200%
Aug 30, 2018
11
22
I believe there is much bigger problem with those giant tech companies than the fact they censor the content on their platform. From the top of my head, at least Google and Facebook have plans to also provide worldwide internet coverage. What happens after they make it real and the regular providers cannot compete anymore and die? Will internet stay synonymous to freedom? I guess not. The internet itself will become their platform.
 

AFMKelvin

Some Profound Quote Goes Here
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
199%
Jan 26, 2016
733
1,456
31
Rice, Texas
It's funny how all the big tech companies have strayed from the foundations that built those companies. The idea to give a voice to the voiceless. To push boundaries and say the things you wanted to say. The whole hacker culture and free spirit of the early founders of sylicon valley has been eradicated.

Now they have turn into the very thing they were trying to break away from. If you don't agree with their rebellious attitude you are a tyrant that must be silenced.

For those of you that don't known Facebook has been on a full blown censorship campaign against conservative viewpoints since 2016. They changed the algorithm to automatically flag certain keywords as offensive. Even images like the green frog Pepe were been censored.

I am by no means a conservative but I love free speech so it does affect me too. The latest example was the censorship of Alex Jones by all the big tech Giants. If you silence him today who's next tomorrow?

If anyone is interested there's a new social media platform that's revolutionary because it's based on blockchain technology. Once you upload something it's on the blockchain forever. It's free from the clutches of hosting companies so it can't be shut down.

Check out their website out AKASHA Project | Co-creating The Language of Freedom
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

ShadyDave

New Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
58%
Dec 5, 2017
12
7
24
Alamosa
Yes, but it's not a "freedom of speech" or First Amendment issue at this point. These are separate issues. Freedom of speech doesn't apply from Facebook, et al, because they can censor whatever they want.

If you would like to reread what I said I was very specific that large company censorship is wrong, not illegal. Anyone sensible knows that not everything illegal is wrong and everything that is legal isn't always right. I obviously know private companies can censor, what my point was that they shouldn't practice selective censorship.

This is patently ridiculous, and a logical fallacy.

Please expound upon this. How is it ridiculous and how is it illogical?

So... /r/ketogains is a pretty small group and not topic-less. In fact, Reddit has been accused of censoring (it's true, they have; they're privately owned!) but doesn't fall under your definition, though they'll certainly delete your posts if you go in there ranting about how they're gonna die if they don't eat more carbs.

A small subgroup that is part of a larger platform is different that a site dedicated to a specific topic. The situation in which I am speaking of would be if a whole Reddit group was deleted to achieve an agenda. (Such as if a car loving group was being censored because it triggered environmentalists.) Reddit as a whole would fall under my definition. (A large social media company) As for shitposting (Such as you said about going on rants that are specifically against a community and their guidelines) of course that doesn't need to exist because it doesn't belong there. However though, if there was (or is, I'm not going to check) a community dedicated to the health benefits of high carb diets, it would be wrong to censor the specific group within their own area.

"Certain opinions?" What does that mean? Who's the arbiter of that? And what does "wrong" mean? Who are you to tell anyone else what's "wrong?"

Certain opinions means exactly what it is, certain opinions. The arbiter of that would be no one as no one owns the sole rights to specific opinions. As for the "wrong" stuff, who are you to tell anyone else that they can't have an opinion of what is wrong.

Can I join your Underwater Basket Weaving course you sell and then just be a straight-up dick to everyone there without consequence? Can I make death threats and scare everyone off? No, you'd kick my a$$ off. And you'd be right to, especially if you owned the platform.

Once again you are using a small community in which your argument is invalid. As I stated already small communities are different than entire platforms. I also stated that content of criminal nature should be censored still. Are death threats of criminal nature? I hope you know the answer to that.
 

ShadyDave

New Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
58%
Dec 5, 2017
12
7
24
Alamosa
I believe there is much bigger problem with those giant tech companies than the fact they censor the content on their platform. From the top of my head, at least Google and Facebook have plans to also provide worldwide internet coverage. What happens after they make it real and the regular providers cannot compete anymore and die? Will internet stay synonymous to freedom? I guess not. The internet itself will become their platform.
That is very true, I was only thinking about what is already happening I guess.
 

MJ DeMarco

I followed the science; all I found was money.
Staff member
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Summit Attendee
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
445%
Jul 23, 2007
38,076
169,492
Utah
This will be the last comment on this "debate" because this thread isn't to debate your opinion on the legality, right/wrong etc.

Is MJ evil for having his platform his way?

You're comparing APPLES to ORANGES.

You're obviously OK with having your TEXT MESSAGES, EMAILS, and VOICE CALLS monitored and then censored (when they contain "wrong think") simply because they use a giant corporation to facilitate that communication.

We're talking about widely adopted and used communication systems, "public square" stuff.

When people want to investigate entrepreneurship or business, 99.2% of the world doesn't come to The Fastlane Forum to hear my preferred ideology, all under the guise that it is the absolute truth and non-partisan.

When I visit Buzzfeed or Brietbart, I know exactly what kind of narrative view I'll be receiving. Partisanship is presumed and obvious, not covert.

The fact is, people aren't smart enough to realize that their "search resources" have been co-opted by a particular ideology and that they're not getting a full spectrum of either truth or opinion. Worse, this narrow worldview is then pushed everywhere into the mainstream to the point, you can't avoid it.

No, I don't want my iPhone default "news" to push The BezosTimes, HuffPo, VOX, and Salon articles, and then I have to jump through hoops on fire to get rid of it.

What the technocrats are doing is akin to having a phone company in 1970's listening in to your phone calls and disconnecting them because "we heard speech that we consider 'hate'". We've reached the point that anything that disagrees with the preferred mainstream narrative is now labeled HATE, when in reality, it's pure censorship.

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?

Of course not. You're using a slippery slope and a straw man argument. The people being censored aren't threatening violence, their opinions are simply being muzzled and pejoratively labeled as "hate" -- so if I advertise on social media that "democratic socialists" are useful idiots, I guess I'm spewing hate and subject to being muzzled.

There's a big difference between FREE Speech (Trump is Hitler! Clinton is a criminal and should be in prison!) and speech that has no protection, such as threatening the life of someone. Yet, YOU CAN threaten someone on social media if your threat is directed at specific people with specific political leanings as evaluated by some millennial snowflake in Mountain View California.

Free speech does not you entitle you to threatening or slanderous speech. So yes, if neo-Nazis and/or Antifa/neo-Commy thugs who are making threats, they should be censored. There's a big difference between that and Alex Jones conspiracy rhetoric.

Unfortunately in today's hyper-partisan world as ensconced by the tech-giants, the former statement (Trump is Hitler) will get you a "blue check mark" and a legion of followers, while the other (Clinton is a criminal!) will get you banned.

Anyhow, this thread is NOT to argue the legality or opinion of the censorship (and how regulation, if any, fits in) the fact of the matter is, IT IS HAPPENING.

And because it is happening, there is an opportunity.


This thread is about the opportunity. Please stick to that topic.

If not, I will start CENSORING (removing) opinions that have nothing to do with the opportunity. See how that works in my small little community which 99% of the world DOES NOT use as a central form of communication?

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

LittleWolfie

Silver Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
56%
Jun 28, 2018
951
531
Holbeach Hurn
...
I suggested this a few years ago, but it has recently reached a tipping point.


I still think a Twitter alternative is viable, not a big fan of Gab.
Here you go.
Peepeth

These are now technically viable due to the advances in distributed ledgers and crytography. The etherum virtual machine means you can now write any distributed version of any app, the hard part is getting the critical mass of users and making a simpler entry into the application. think Etherum Name Service and ETH APIs are going to be big. The average user doesn't want or need the complexity, currently in the space. Imagine if you had to fill out the DNS records by hand to get online with your new PC.

Steemit is the distributed Reddit. I forget the name of the youtube equivalent.
 

Roli

Platinum Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
160%
Jun 3, 2015
2,061
3,301
I am part of a community called Steemit and its suite of apps from youtube clones to twitter. They are all free from centralised censorship, however that does not mean if enough users take offence to material they can't flag it.

Steemit.com
dtube.com
dsound.com
dlive.com

and a bunch of others I can't remember.

Steemit is 2 years old, dtube about a year I think.
 

MJ DeMarco

I followed the science; all I found was money.
Staff member
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Summit Attendee
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
445%
Jul 23, 2007
38,076
169,492
Utah
I am part of a community called Steemit and its suite of apps from youtube clones to twitter. They are all free from centralised censorship, however that does not mean if enough users take offence to material they can't flag it.

Looks like all the alternatives are going with a blockchain element.
 

rogue synthetic

Gold Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
310%
Aug 2, 2017
348
1,079
Granted I'm not always the most up to date on these technologies, but I find myself scratching my head about what exactly Ethereum and co. are supposed to do here.

What's the advantage of using cryptotech over the usual protocol layers and existing database/web tech?

If the idea is to encrypt source-code on a blockchain... okay, but what function is this serving?

Or is the idea to make an encrypted and distributed database to hold content? That seems like it would get out of hand pretty quick...

Distribution? BitTorrent was doing this 20 years ago.

Bitcoin at least builds in an incentive structure for using it. I'm just not seeing with with the Web 2.0-but-on-blockchain applications.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to discourage anybody. It's just that I'm not sure the imagination is floating as widely as it could... it's all incremental improvements instead of making some serious Zero to One leaps in creativity.

Anybody got a heads-up on this?
 

amp0193

Legendary Contributor
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Summit Attendee
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
444%
May 27, 2013
3,637
16,157
United States
I believe the big opportunities are...

Facebook problem being, college kids post their debauchery then show up in their parents or some other "old" person's feed.

Snapchat pretty much took care of this.

Most of today's college kids have been using it for years by this point.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
G

GuestUser4aMPs1

Guest
Or is the idea to make an encrypted and distributed database to hold content? That seems like it would get out of hand pretty quick...

To my understanding, I've always thought a social media platform built on blockchain would be preferable since private user data is encrypted by the network and can't be unravelled by one single entity. So no NSA backdoors in social apps.

But I also don't know much about the tech, so take it with a grain of salt.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on how it could get out of hand.
Care to elaborate?
 

rogue synthetic

Gold Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
310%
Aug 2, 2017
348
1,079
I'm interested to hear your thoughts on how it could get out of hand.
Care to elaborate?

I'm just thinking about the logistics of scaling a database that gets larger with every transaction, where everyone has to have a copy of it and transactions are permanently encoded in the unalterable blockchain.

This mostly makes sense for what a cryptocurrency is meant to do (part of the point is to keep the books without depending on a trusted third party), and Bitcoin is having to face these challenges in order to keep this working. But it seems complete overkill for the usual web 2.0 applications, which are mainly just databases plus some nifty front-end UI functionality.

Mainly I'm just wondering what advantages the blockchain tech offers over other currently-existing encryption and distribution methods.

And something else... I'm old enough to remember and have used Usenet way back in the Before Times. The NNTP protocol was already doing a lot of the distributed censorship-resistant work back in 1996. Once the social media companies started consolidating all the traffic, that kinda fell to the side.

I could be wrong here, but my hunch is that blockchain-buzz is riding on some of the vogue of 'encryption' and 'decentralization' to try and recapture some of that old functionality... but I'd be worried that the problem isn't with the technology so much as the user habits and desire for convenience that made Big Social into the monoliths they are.

Anyway. Just me thinking out loud, feel free to ignore.
 

GoGetter24

Gold Contributor
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
210%
Oct 8, 2017
566
1,188
Various
What the technocrats are doing is akin to having a phone company in 1970's listening in to your phone calls and disconnecting them because "we heard speech that we consider 'hate'".
An interesting and apt way of putting it.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

GoGetter24

Gold Contributor
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
210%
Oct 8, 2017
566
1,188
Various
I'm just thinking about the logistics of scaling a database that gets larger with every transaction, where everyone has to have a copy of it and transactions are permanently encoded in the unalterable blockchain.
Yeah, it simply doesn't work. As anyone who tried using bitcoin during the peak knows, the moment it actually gets popular, the clearing speed drops through the floor and the transaction costs go through the roof.

People aren't understanding this decentralization situation because they haven't spent the time to actually think through why centralization happens in the first place. It's not just because governments and big tech companies have some ominous oppressive power. People have voluntarily behaved in a way that has caused mass centralization. They have willingly and eagerly handed over the power.

Contrary to being some decentralizing force, the internet has been the most severe catalyst of centralization mankind has ever seen. Facebook has 2.2 billion active users. That's more than a quarter of the earth. And they've moved into ISP services to continue expanding their reach even further.

I don't think people are fully appreciating the gravity of what has been unfolding as a result of the internet. It has been quietly F*cking everyone up and everyone just seems to want to use it even more.

Unless there is some severe counter-reaction to the internet and its centralizing effects, society is going to be increasingly dysfunctional. And starting with "the internet is fundamentally good, we just need to tweak it with clever IT wankery" isn't going to discover the solution.

The movie The Matrix has proven itself to be an incredible portent. The wires are just the next bit: with people like Elon Musk working on neural links because "bandwidth is the limiter". One wonders now if removing that limit is a good thing. I submit it could be a game ender. People, especially the young generation, are already completely plugged in with their eyes and hands.

With guys spending all their time playing computer games, wanking to high def porn, reading blogs & social media, watching tv shows and movies online, and then spending all their time at work on the internet; with girls spending all day on social media looking for attention and validation; with both groups using crap like Tinder: "sexual relations and validation as a service".

Meanwhile the psychos of society are using it to exert a level of control, and to extract benefits, that their predecessors could only have dreamed of.

Do you all realize how F*cked this is getting? We've just sleepwalked into an insane level of dysfunction.

Gentlemen, we're always looking for the next big thing, the next wave to catch, so we can get on it and get filthy rich. I submit the next big wave is going to be in some big counter-reaction to the internet. Non-internet services and products.

And even if that doesn't happen, the ever-consumption of society by the internet, and upcoming generations being increasingly plugged in and incapable of real world pursuits, is going to start draining competition from other real world physical businesses, so there will be increasing opportunities to make money offline.
 

Roli

Platinum Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
160%
Jun 3, 2015
2,061
3,301
Looks like all the alternatives are going with a blockchain element.

Yup, the great thing about the blockchain is even if something does get flagged down, or even deleted you can still find it on the 'chain.

In fact anyone could access the info and make a 'flag list' site with all the censored stuff if you so pleased.

It has its limitations, but in many ways the blockchain is the future.
 

AFMKelvin

Some Profound Quote Goes Here
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
199%
Jan 26, 2016
733
1,456
31
Rice, Texas
Granted I'm not always the most up to date on these technologies, but I find myself scratching my head about what exactly Ethereum and co. are supposed to do here.

What's the advantage of using cryptotech over the usual protocol layers and existing database/web tech?

If the idea is to encrypt source-code on a blockchain... okay, but what function is this serving?

Or is the idea to make an encrypted and distributed database to hold content? That seems like it would get out of hand pretty quick...

Distribution? BitTorrent was doing this 20 years ago.

Bitcoin at least builds in an incentive structure for using it. I'm just not seeing with with the Web 2.0-but-on-blockchain applications.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to discourage anybody. It's just that I'm not sure the imagination is floating as widely as it could... it's all incremental improvements instead of making some serious Zero to One leaps in creativity.

Anybody got a heads-up on this?

Ethereum is only one of many blockchains. They specialize in smart contracts.

Not all blockchains encrypt information.

How can encrypted and distributed database to hold content get out of hand quick? That's what blockchain is already doing.

BitTorrent is just Peer to Peer it still depends on the main internet infrastructure it's not spread out to all users.

The existing databases are centralized that means that the authority over the database can censor speech just by deleting it from the database. For example a website can be censored by removing the domain name from the domain name registrar. It can be censored by removing the website from the web host. It can also be censored by Internet Providers by blocking access to that website. The easiest way to censor speech is by the centralized social media companies like facebook, instagram or twitter. All they have to do is delete you account if they don't like the content you create.

Blockchain technology is decentralized there's no way to censor it because the information is spread out to all users in the network. It also does not need an internet provider, a domain registrar or a website host nor is it own by one company. So far blockchain is unhackable. Information coming from a source can't be altered or deleted. It stays in the blockchain forever.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

LittleWolfie

Silver Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
56%
Jun 28, 2018
951
531
Holbeach Hurn
Looks like all the alternatives are going with a blockchain element.

Hardly surprising it's a perfect use case.

Granted I'm not always the most up to date on these technologies, but I find myself scratching my head about what exactly Ethereum and co. are supposed to do here.

What's the advantage of using cryptotech over the usual protocol layers and existing database/web tech?

If the idea is to encrypt source-code on a blockchain... okay, but what function is this serving?

Or is the idea to make an encrypted and distributed database to hold content? That seems like it would get out of hand pretty quick...

Distribution? BitTorrent was doing this 20 years ago.

Bitcoin at least builds in an incentive structure for using it. I'm just not seeing with with the Web 2.0-but-on-blockchain applications.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to discourage anybody. It's just that I'm not sure the imagination is floating as widely as it could... it's all incremental improvements instead of making some serious Zero to One leaps in creativity.

Anybody got a heads-up on this?

Sure ETH(and NEO and counterparty/omnilayer are all slightly different than to the other cryptos, think crypto 2.0.) Under it is etherum virtual machine not eth crypto. The go here is to be an decentralised turing complete virtual server that can't be shut off, or edited or deleted (immutable). Now take something like AWS their function is to enable applications like Google and Twitter and your SaaS apps to work in a decentralised scalable manner. ETH is basically the crypto AWS. The coding on top of it is what the average user cares about. Of course unless you particularly care about avoiding centralised control and editing or removal of information then EVM could be a good fit.

To my understanding, I've always thought a social media platform built on blockchain would be preferable since private user data is encrypted by the network and can't be unravelled by one single entity. So no NSA backdoors in social apps.

But I also don't know much about the tech, so take it with a grain of salt.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on how it could get out of hand.
Care to elaborate?

Since its distributed the NSA(did you know their are lots of eavesdropping full nodes in Langley? Just what you need to identify people against accounts..) Can see whatever they want, they can't edit or remove it though. It's possible they could disable it by gaining 51% control of processing power and preventing all nwe transactions, but as China has learnt stopping the access to data on blockchain is much harder than censoring the web.
 

LittleWolfie

Silver Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
56%
Jun 28, 2018
951
531
Holbeach Hurn
I'm just thinking about the logistics of scaling a database that gets larger with every transaction, where everyone has to have a copy of it and transactions are permanently encoded in the unalterable blockchain.

This mostly makes sense for what a cryptocurrency is meant to do (part of the point is to keep the books without depending on a trusted third party), and Bitcoin is having to face these challenges in order to keep this working. But it seems complete overkill for the usual web 2.0 applications, which are mainly just databases plus some nifty front-end UI functionality.

Mainly I'm just wondering what advantages the blockchain tech offers over other currently-existing encryption and distribution methods.

And something else... I'm old enough to remember and have used Usenet way back in the Before Times. The NNTP protocol was already doing a lot of the distributed censorship-resistant work back in 1996. Once the social media companies started consolidating all the traffic, that kinda fell to the side.

I could be wrong here, but my hunch is that blockchain-buzz is riding on some of the vogue of 'encryption' and 'decentralization' to try and recapture some of that old functionality... but I'd be worried that the problem isn't with the technology so much as the user habits and desire for convenience that made Big Social into the monoliths they are.

Anyway. Just me thinking out loud, feel free to ignore.


Your right, blockchain did grow out of the early crypto work, though the main advantage is multiple people with multiple copies or full nodes that have to agree. You can fiddle to some extent. A major advantage of block chain is the delay tolerance. "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of hard drives" You can't send Twitter by post. Email can always use pop3 via physical carrier of course.

Your right that a lot of these are just over hyped applications. However a blockchain full nodes can be surprising low intestivitey. <14GB. The smartphone I'm typing on has a larger memory card than that. Of course EVM is intensive that's a function of the design. One could build a less resource intensive one, wirh sufficient bandwidth, a raspberry pi is just fine.

If I destroy the encrypted message on another cryptography it's gone for good. With blockchain I have to destroy all the copies, which gets exponentially harder with each node added.


Ethereum is only one of many blockchains. They specialize in smart contracts.

Not all blockchains encrypt information.

How can encrypted and distributed database to hold content get out of hand quick? That's what blockchain is already doing.

BitTorrent is just Peer to Peer it still depends on the main internet infrastructure it's not spread out to all users.

The existing databases are centralized that means that the authority over the database can censor speech just by deleting it from the database. For example a website can be censored by removing the domain name from the domain name registrar. It can be censored by removing the website from the web host. It can also be censored by Internet Providers by blocking access to that website. The easiest way to censor speech is by the centralized social media companies like facebook, instagram or twitter. All they have to do is delete you account if they don't like the content you create.

Blockchain technology is decentralized there's no way to censor it because the information is spread out to all users in the network. It also does not need an internet provider, a domain registrar or a website host nor is it own by one company. So far blockchain is unhackable. Information coming from a source can't be altered or deleted. It stays in the blockchain forever.

Actually all blockchains do encrypt information, you can send a signed message or add in blockchain graffiti on Bitcoin core. You encrypt and decrypt the transaction data when sending Bitcoin(you can see this in action if you set up a paper wallet, a couple of hot wallets and a computer with a watching wallet then send a transaction from the paper wallet)

Removing the domain name doesn't censor a website see 127.0.0.1 Or
93.184.216.34 . Tat's literally the only way you can block an eth site. If you remember the address or have it bookmarked the loss of dns/ens isn't a problem for you to access a site. Tour right that you or the isp or a government can take down files on the document on the web. You can't delete or edit your own files on the blockchain though.

A major source of friction is there is no easy access to this kind of site, ENS squatting is going to make a killing if ETH beats out it's competitors. Just like domain names did. I suspect the issue to mass adoption of these apps is part promotion and part easing friction. Your average user isn't going to sit and install and configure everything. For someone with access to a market that cares about uncensored content, creators that care about uncensored content and funding to make the dapp come true, this is a billion dollar idea.
 

GoGetter24

Gold Contributor
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
210%
Oct 8, 2017
566
1,188
Various
As I have raised here in my (lonely) discussion thread: Centralization / decentralization discussion roundtable AKA "resisting big tech", none of these are true alternatives.

These alternatives are missing the point. The core problem is centralization. These large sites can get away with this simply because they have the power, and they are gaining that power from the centralization effects that make everyone use them.

What also happens with these alternatives, is they get populated by political extremist wackos, usually the far-right. The far-right are the first group that gets kicked off mainstream platforms, so they are the first to start using free-speech alternatives.

This results in "free speech" platforms being populated with the worst forms of speech possible, which hurts its legitimacy.

The solution is decentralization and lateral movement. It's networks of distributed speech, not central speech platforms. It would involve small sites like forums & blogs, forming ties with each other, instead of just being isolated spokes visited only via google searches or a cross-link here and there.

The smaller and more distributed the speech platforms (and let's be frank: small speech platforms are 10 times worse for speech policing than large ones), the less important it is to demand free speech rights from a central actor. People can just move laterally to another outlet.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

nyc217

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
107%
Jul 7, 2017
54
58
29
New York, NY
...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.


View attachment 21146

View attachment 21147

Hey @MJ DeMarco great thread. Quick question though, as I am seriously considering going down and committing to this idea.

Why are you not a big fan of Gab ?

I’ve done some research and seen that they have serious issues with spam (sexually explicit spam), paid subscription, and now, they are beginning to act more like the platforms that they are the “alternatives” to. Anything else ?

Once again, thanks for always sharing your knowledge and point of views on this forum !
 
Last edited:

MJ DeMarco

I followed the science; all I found was money.
Staff member
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Summit Attendee
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
445%
Jul 23, 2007
38,076
169,492
Utah
Why are you not a big fan of Gab ?

I don't remember, I tried it years ago and didn't like it. Maybe it was the wonky dot-a-i that no one will remember.

Maybe it has changed and is different now.
 

Post New Topic

Please SEARCH before posting.
Please select the BEST category.

Post new topic

Guest post submissions offered HERE.

New Topics

Fastlane Insiders

View the forum AD FREE.
Private, unindexed content
Detailed process/execution threads
Ideas needing execution, more!

Join Fastlane Insiders.

Top