The Problem - MGTOW

I will do a video with a non-math explanation.

One of the areas of interest is granting webtorrent capability to peers that wish to have their nodes "serve the website". This would allow javascript to use the OT spec to decode content, bridging the gap between the network and the https. An on-ramp in other words. So, there's that. Probably coupled with a PoW to slow the flooding capability down. (i.e. each peer can specify its own PoW level for inbound requests).

@zeitgeisteater: I've been using private torrent trackers for many years. I can envision a scenario in which individual participants can lend their computing resources, just the way they seed torrents, to other peers. I can envision the online infrastructure being contrived such that participants compete for rewards (the way they compete for seeding buffer on private trackers) and help deliver a better quality of service for the other participants. This arrangement has the added benefit that the risk and responsibility is devolved to the individual participants in the network. So takedown requests would have to be addressed to millions of people rather than to one company. But I can't help but wonder if it's all pie in the sky. If people cared about their freedom of expression and speech so much that they would go through all this trouble of creating an alternative internet, then they would just as well take to the streets and take the fight to big-tech, big-government and big-business, who are behind the censorship and repression. Why keep running away like a weasel from the encroaching dragon of censorship and repression when you have the wherwithall to take the fight to the beast? It's people's collective desire for freedom that's absent. This being said, we lone wolves have to adapt to the situation we find ourselves in and find a way to create an island of freedom in an otherwise unfree internet. It takes the collective a long time to come to its senses.

@shox: I'm interested in your data regarding division of computing resources as the per peer level. There are two problems working together. (A) There is no money in creating a truly decentralized swiss army knife of social interaction and data sharing. Napster tried to turn it into a business and they died. (B) Because of the former point, no sidenet exists for the normals to seize on. Thus, we cannot measure how many would seize on it if it were available. The precedent we do have suggests it musts be available before it's supported (e.g. the mass exodus from Whatsapp to Signal that crashed the Signal servers).

@zeitgeisteater: I don't really have data as such, just brainstorms and general directions in which my thoughts lean, in light of the present circumstances. Here's my first brainstorm inspired by the torrent example: 1) Get people to host media files on their home computers or rented servers eg seedboxes, in their torrent clients; 2) build an application layer upon this network of peers to stream files from a number of peers as and when a file is requested by consumers; 3) Have the consumers subscribe to some online service like mgtow.tv which will collect money and distribute it to people who lend their computers/servers to this effort; reward them commensurate to the quality of service they provide eg bandwidth, speed etc; the consumers of data can also become seeders themselves so that they don't have to pay money to subscribe. With this ecosystem in place, there is a healthy bit of competition to provide resources to the overall system; this helps improve quality of service. Also, risk is spread out across multiple users rather than concentrated in one server provider who can be threatened by the authorities. 4) Of course, the key to the success of this entire ecosystem is to provide quality, not just of content but of service. There needs to be a aggressive effort to make the platform as appealing as possible. What I love about private trackers is the close-knit community, the unrestricted access to information and the numerous links between pieces of information eg in the side panel, there are links to 10 other movies which are similar to a movie I'm downloading. And these are highly informed recommendations by people who really understand the subject, not just sponsored links. Think for example of Wikipedia. You view a page on Karl Marx and on the side there are numerous links to Engels, Hegel and the like. Another key to the platorm's success, initially at least, is vetting the people who join it. I've seen how well communities thrive they they are more discriminating in who joins them. We want people who won't undermine it and flood it with DDOS attacks. Anyway, those are some thoughts of mine. I'll be cogitating more along the same lines.

Response to the Napster argument: Those were different times. The internet was the wild west back then, an uncharted territory. No one was censoring anyone. Now there is a genuine demand to get away from the suffocating censorship of the mature internet. Think, for example of all the people who are having vaccine side effects yet when they post on social media, their posts or videos get deleted. The demand is strong enough to warrant retrying the Napster experiment. This time, the money will roll in, especially if, as I said, an effort is made to make the platform as rich and appealing as possible.

@shox: I will do some video replies to fill in the blanks as others may have something to learn here.

At best it is buying time. It is not solving the fundamental problem (centralization) or the sand shifting under everyone's feet. As long as there is a central host taking on all of the liability for content distribution the exposure problem will remain. The ideal is: Distributed/decentralized, immutable encoding, oblivious transfer, and THEN favorable jurisdictions compounded on top of that. Favorable jurisdictions at best are icing on the cake, not the cake itself.

@zeitgeisteater: hey, good to know man, i sent him this video via PM. hopefully he will take the time to look at what you have to say.

It's so sad what things have come to: people from the west are looking to other countries to find a safe place for their websites. The most exemplary example of this DailyStormer, a white-nationalist site which had its old domains seized. Now it uses dailystormer.su. .su stands for Soviet Union, or at least it was intended for the Soviet Union. So they in a way fled from the West to the Soviet Union to re-establish their freedom of speech.