This afternoon, a self-described “Scandinavian freelance journalist based in New York” by the name of Lena Maria Aula very politely reached out to me with a few questions for an upcoming article. She claimed to be working on a piece about “tech firms developing alternative, autonomous internet solutions for the global audience.”
Anyways, since there’s no way on God’s Green Earth that she’ll publish such a flaming of the principal company she plans to cover, viz. MaidSafe, for posterity, here are my answers :
1. MaidSafe appears to be the newest contender to ‘reinvent’ the internet. In the media it is portrayed as the first functional, serious alternative to the internet as we know it. Is this a correct statement?
No, it is unfortunately not. The statement you’ve made hereabove is incorrect for the simple reason that MaidSafe is not a functional product of any description or in any way outside of the narrow confines of the hollow heads calling themselves “lead developers” of this woebegone project. Much to the chagrin of these untalented developers and their unscrupulous promoters, the MaidSafe endeavour hasn’t made any appreciable impact in either a practical or an intellectual sense since I called it out as a scam on April 20, 2014, nor does there appear to be an imminent breakthrough at this point or at any point in the foreseeable future. The entirety of the purported interest and “buzz” surrounding this website pretending to be a software development project at all points in its unfortunate history is exclusively the result of its marketeers none-too-convenient regurgitation of a few “trending” buzzwords targeted specifically at the lamestream media and its shallow adherents. There’s nothing beyond this superficiality.
2. On several internet forums users seem to be of the opinion that MaidSafe and its equivalents are old innovations and rather outdated. Therefore, it will be hard for them to attract any active users. Do you agree with this statement?
MaidSafe in the sense of its undeveloped product can neither be old nor new nor nor outdated nor an innovation in any sense of the term whatsoever. That being said, MaidSafe in the sense of its vapourware pretenses to importance and relevance in a space dominated exclusively by Bitcoin and TMSR~ is as old as finance itself, which is to say as old as scamming itself, which is certainly 3-4 millennia by this point. Still, it’s hard not to agree with the conclusion that active users will be hard to attract, just as they will be for the atomic-powered hovertruck that I’m building in my garage. Even if either project gets off the ground, they’ll both have more holes in them than an acoustic ceiling panel and be every bit as structurally unsound.
3. When there are no servers, there are no attacks. The first selling point is safety. Are they as safe as they claim in your opinion? Are there any specific risks related to the ‘people’s internet’?
There’s no there there, so what do you mean no servers, no attacks ? The claims made by MaidSafe as to its “features” are not unlike the priest’s description of the afterlife : both are unsubstantiated and unfalsifiable claims that have no place in public discourse among intelligent individuals. As to the “people’s internet”, it’s here, it’s queer, get used to it. As we speak, we’re wading through fecal matter up to our necks – all from various attempts to make the Internet at once “accessible” and increasingly a replacement for television. Obviously, this is an immoral degradation of a once-great intellectual network, but I’m optimistic about the future. USG.FACEBOOK seems to be corralling the herd nicely, leaving more fresh air for those with the means and abilities to use blogs and IRC properly.
4. Why have so many failed in creating Internet 2.0?
There are probably a lot of reasons for this, but my natural inclination is to say that the idiots trying to create Internet 2.0 weren’t beaten, shamed, and humiliated enough as children. Too many gold stars for participation, not enough cracks across the knuckles for talking out of turn.
5. The newest contender MaidSafe has said that it will make money when users make and sell apps for their innovation. How realistic is that? Are there any other ways to monetize on their innovation? (Monetize = make substantial profit).
Any claims that MaidSafe makes, whether regarding remuneration or technological innovation, can be slotted firmly in the incinerator without any fear of depriving future generations of any benefit whatsoever. This isn’t the library of Alexandria, this is toilet paper unfit for Muscovites in 1992. MaidSafe’s claims of user-generated “profits” of any sort are as realistic as the moon being made of cheese and every bit as laughable.
The only question remaining isn’t who’s laughing – everyone with half a clue is – the question is : who isn’t ?