[–] Pattern_Blind 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Banking and Advertising systems too. No Kikes should be deciding who can and cannot advertise or bank on the net either. Those are two major important instruments in the deplatforming debate. 250,000 democratic Tranny Bots should not be able to crowd out through mass flagging straight white males they do not like from banking and advertising too.

[–] eronburr 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Nothing's stopping Americans other than fear. I tried making things better but most people are impossible to sell. How do you replace verizon/att/comcast when people want to be sat down and sold on why they should switch?
Do you know I had 150 sales employees and only 13 field-techs and only 2 net-engineers for my ISP? The hours I wasted on salary to expand are just that, a waste. Americans want a deal and don't think about what they're supporting. I'm sad to say but I don't think that'll change in my lifetime, it's only gotten worse and worse.

[–] Onlio 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

We need constitutionally-compliant elected officials

[–] SteafanFox 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Ive been thinking about this alot

What would be required to create a social media system invunreable to bad actors?

I believe the main keys would be:

Blockchain - obviously utilizing Blockchains incredible power of being secure without trusting an authority would be key.

Media - The success of such a site would either be it's ability to gather ALL types of media (video, audio, written) and all types of attention (short like Snapchat and long like Youtube) OR it's ability to specialise in each of these domains, and as we get ONE win on these platforms (say a short form written tool becomes big) we could branch out.

Storage - the next problem is how to store the content, because we can certainly share youtube videos, but could we host videos? Bitchute is very slow for example. How do we solve the storage problem?

Incentive - how to do we incetiviz the platform builders BEYOND ethics, how could we reward them with money for building such a thing and sarificing their time? Perhaps they would gain massive leverage and followers and thus spin off a business - or disclouse an open ownership in say 5% of the Blockchain nodes?

Power - in the absolute worst case scenario and this censorship reaches it's logical conclusion, they will be BANNED from the internet and they will lose access to national infastructre like electricity, so how coudl we power our own "network"? Solar panels for each node or something

Values - this is also very clear, we want a free market of ideas, based on the Libertarian principles expoused by those British philosophers like Adam Smith. How do we create a culture that implies this dogma towards freedom of speech, does that mean NO HATESPEECH laws? Does that mean ANYTHING goes? Cause then it risks becoming like Silk ROad and... well the founder go imprisoned didn't he?

~

I'm thinking big picture so many of the details are likely wrong, woudl love to discuss this here

[–] MehWhatever 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

If you want to make a site like Reddit or Voat or some kind of mobile app, good luck. You'll get shut out of app stores so that just leaves the web.

Then there's the issue of funding. If you've got a billion dollars in the bank or a benefactor who does, fine. Otherwise, you'd have to convince people to pony up cash each month to use it because you can't rely on advertising, it's too easy of a target for the leftist mobs.

Even taking cash for access is problematic. The mobs will go after your payment processor. Sure, you can use some crypto coin but good luck with that, you just added a big hurdle for anyone not already into that which is the vast majority of people.

The only real way to do something like this is using a "DWeb" or decentralized web site. The technologies for doing this are still really primitive and there's not a whole lot of money going into developing them but progress is being made.

At that point, it's basically a free service so you'd have to have people willing to build and maintain it for free. You'd also run into moderation issues as you simply can't make it a free for all. It would quickly devolve into a mess of spam, scams, kiddie porn, and garbage content.

You can't rely on humans, paid or volunteer, it's too easy for them co-opt things for their own agenda. You'd need a potent AI to handle moderation, something that's probably a decade or more away from being possible.

I think that, in a nutshell, is what you'd have to come up with:

  • Decentralized web app, built and maintained as an open source app by volunteers.
  • AI moderation that keeps the content free of scams, spam, and kiddie porn as well as detects bot accounts and people trying to manipulate the content.

None of this is something you could do today.

[–] Plavonica 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Storage is easy compared to connection and throughput.

[–] Atomized_Individual 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

https://minds.com meets all those criteria.

[–] AlaricTheFirst 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

What we need are decent alternatives instead of the current internet monopolies being facilitated by regulatory laws backed by corrupt politicians.

[–] FlailTail 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Not going to happen. Guess (((who))) promotes and benefits most from free markets?

Look into Eric Striker's solutions.

[–] RedditSureDoesSuck 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Right here. Never mind the information monopoly currently in the hands of Google.

[–] Caesarkid1 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Here is the original article.

[–] 30MagazineClip 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Problem is banks / payment processors are making it impossible for alternatives to take off by denying payment processing. Censoring establishments, even in societies that don't have free speech, would get dumped over night. Alternatives would be big business.

[–] Fearmonger 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Why not make it that constitutional rights need to be honored by corporations & the government ?

[–] Cooking_with_Alf 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Nobody has successfully argued the case that private corporations are obligated to protect your speech on their own property, and nobody will. It is likened to the notion that you must allow someone to spout communist nonsense in your own house! How about you do the simple thing and stop using social media and google? Why continue rewarding communists through draconian legislation?

load more comments ▼ (5 remaining)