It is extremely hard to stay Anon. Really really hard
They went after individuals not the network.
And yes governments do like decentralised networks. If you havenât noticed theyâre a fan of the internet.
Because they own the network. Have you read the Snowden book. LOL. Yes I would be a fan too
The internet is just a connection of computers. They log everything. You donât need to control the network just the people.
Youâre being very disingenuous about many of your claims in an effort to prove your point. In your example the threat is the people who plan to do harm; not the payment system that allows full traceability between parties.
Iâm not kidding myself. I fully understand what weâre signing up to by keeping this type of proposal. Perhaps the network will fail because of it. If it does then so be it, but Iâd rather not make a deal with a devil just to keep the ârevolutionariesâ happy.
1 Like
How is it disengenous? In your example the guilty parties are the people uploading revenge porn not the decentralised network maintaining it.
Itâs not just about being a revolutionary. Itâs about understanding why Bitcoin and Ethereum have not only survived but thrived when centralised iterations that came before them failed. If Dfinity isnât going to follow their path I fail to see why it bothered to try in the first place. The outcome is foregone conclusion. Governments arenât going to allow financial interests decide whatâs allowed on the internet or not.
There is a big difference between the âguilty partyâ and the âthreatâ. The threat is the thing that is doing, or has the potential, to cause harm or do some sort of damage. I agree that in my example the guilty party is the individual who uploaded the content. But the threat is the content itself. In your example the guilty party is the terrorist group. That same terrorist group could also be the threat (we could get into arguments about the guns but Iâd rather not) or something like the bomb itself could be the threat. If they capture the guilty party but the bomb is missing then the threat has not been neutralized.
Youâre right. We should absolutely try to understand why they both survived/thrived. There are plenty of lessons to be learned there and I think thought leaders like you, @Arthur, Vitalik, and @dominicwilliams should be brought into the fold to figure out the best way to build a platform that provides some decentralized way to censor content at the protocol level. IMO, Thatâs a challenge worth working on. But if youâre telling me thatâs not worth figuring out and we should just allow this awful content to exist outside of the shadows then I canât get behind that. Iâm sorry but I canât.
1 Like
It would still be in the shadows. Apps above The IC can be moderated. No mainstream one would allow it. This material would be banished to apps hardly anyone uses. Itâs no different to how things are now.
No one has explained to me how an image or video that has been uploaded directly to a canister whose controller is set to a black hole can be taken down without this proposal. I donât consider that to be âin the shadowsâ. If that issue can be addressed (maybe it can, i honestly donât know) then I will change my position. But that is whatâs holding me up right now.
It couldnât be taken down no. But itâd be on an app nobody uses. Itâs really no different to how all the CP is on obscure apps or encrypted messenging services now. Thereâs no reason to believe thereâd be any more of it if you couldnât censor The IC or any less of it if you could. These people will find a way.
1 Like
But you donât need an app to access it? You can literally browse to the canister address. Thereâs no obscurity there.
The address is a website. I would call a website an app. Everyone would be on the IC equivalent of Facebook. The CP would be on the IC equivalent of a TOR site. I fail to see the difference.
The difference is that a TOR site can be taken down. Will another one pop-up? sure. But thatâs an ongoing battle.
If we allow this then the content just stays out there forever and the amount of it will just continue to grow endlessly. I donât see how that is the same.
Itâs already growing endlessly. When one TOR site is taken down another pops up with the same images a week later.
Shit ainât going away it will exist in Tor, IC, FBI, Epstein and every other chain. We as a community will do our best to combat it. Prob losing battle
Yes itâs not going anywhere. So donât destroy the value proposition of The IC trying to fight an unwinnable battle. Try to mitigate abuses at layers above in the knowledge an uncensorable IC brings a lot more good than bad to humanity.
Ok. Iâm not trying to be unreasonable. I can see where youâre going with this. But is there nothing we can do in a decentralized world to try and fight that? The IC has so much capability; is it not worth taking the time to figure out if thereâs something we can do at the protocol level to help fight that problem?
Edit: I guess Iâm just surprised we are so willing to dismiss the problem as unsolvable
Prob AI that checks images but dont know if we want to go that route. In making changes to canister
1 Like
People have thought long and hard about these things for years. In a world with multiple competing centres of power if you introduce governance it will be captured. Thereâs simply no way around that. It really is unsolvable. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. So push politics to layers above.
Lots of good things are above politics and democracy. Look at the UN Charter of Human Rights. Itâs the most undemocratic document ever. On top of that bedrock however you can use democracy to build social and crime fighting systems. Build those things on top of The IC, not into it.
4 Likes
Youâve definitely given me more to think about. Iâll have to do some research into any efforts that have been made in the past to combat this problem. If it really is unsolvable then I would agree with you that the protocol should just stay out of it.