The Vapornet Effect
FreeNet and The Importance of Not Over-Emphasizing Political Ideologies In Open Source Distributed Networks
I've been speaking with many Open Source developers and it seems to be a trend of different people with many great ideas on how to create scalable, distributed, decentralized, open networks. However, the best way to make better decisions in the future is to learn from the past.
Freenet, a unified decentralized, scalable, and general-purpose global network, always had the potential to revolutionize the way we communicated and shared information. instead, the Internet won the race and became the de-facto global network by which we all communicate.
Why was a network so promising like Freenet unable to reach critical mass?
What we have learned, in hindsight, is that to achieve critical mass and widespread adoption, networks like Freenet must shift their focus from political ideologies and decentralization to their value proposition, such as messaging, infrastructure scaling, and interoperability. This essay argues that Freenet’s focus on “Free” and “decentralized” is what hindered its growth and suggests that emphasizing its business strengths would have improved its chances of success. This is a learning not just for Freenet, but for other similar networks in the future.
Why The Internet Became Popular
The popularity of the Internet can be attributed to several key factors that allowed it to gain widespread adoption and eventually become the de-facto global network for communication and information sharing. Understanding these factors can provide valuable insights for decentralized open-source networks like Freenet.
Accessibility and ease of use
One of the primary reasons for the Internet’s success was its user-friendly nature, in special HTML, which encouraged more developers and organizations to adopt it.
The development of accessible web browsers, search engines, and other tools made it easy for users and developers to navigate and find information, contributing to its rapid growth and widespread acceptance.
Scalability and adaptability
The internet’s ability to scale and adapt to the needs of users and organizations has been a significant factor in its success. As the number of users and the amount of data exchanged increased, the Internet’s infrastructure (HTML, RFCs, HTTP, etc.) evolved to accommodate these changes, ensuring its continued relevance and utility.
Collaboration and standardization
The collaborative nature of the internet’s development played a crucial role in its success. Various organizations, institutions, and individuals worked together to establish standardized protocols and technologies that facilitated seamless communication and interoperability across the network. This cooperation led to the creation of a robust and flexible system that could be easily adopted by a wide range of users.
Private and public sector support
The Internet benefitted from substantial investments and support from both private (AOL, Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla) and public sectors (CERN, IETF). This backing enabled the development of new technologies, infrastructure, and applications that propelled the growth of the Internet and allowed it to reach a critical mass of users.
Focus on practical applications
The Internet’s success can also be attributed to its emphasis on practical applications and tangible benefits for users and businesses instead of a niche network of tech enthusiasts. The development of email, file-sharing, e-commerce, and other services made it clear that the internet had the potential to revolutionize communication, commerce, and information sharing, attracting more users and organizations to adopt the technology.
Protection of IP
The Internet was never designed to be transparent and interoperable by default[1]. Regardless, Every company had to build their own authentication system, reputation system, search engine, etc., from scratch on the server side without having the ability to develop those features once in the protocol.
It seems like a negative feature of the system, but it's one of the reasons it succeeded in the crazy world we live in. It allowed companies to create walled gardens and profit from their own secret IP, just like what society does with patents and private company structures.
Why Blockchain and Bitcoin Became Popular
Blockchain and Bitcoin followed a similar path. They have gained significant popularity and acceptance in recent years. Their success can be attributed to various factors that made them stand out as innovative and practical solutions in the world of finance and technology. Understanding these factors can offer valuable insights.
Decentralization and security
One of the primary reasons for the popularity of blockchain and Bitcoin is their decentralized nature, which enables a secure and transparent system. It was born out of the 2008 Financial Crisis. Decentralization eliminates the need for a central authority, reducing the risk of fraud, manipulation, and single points of failure. Though it doesn’t solve scams and illegal practices, this feature is particularly appealing to individuals and organizations who prioritize security for their balances and trust in their transactions over delegating responsibility for mistakes to the state or private entities.
Transparency and immutability
Blockchain technology, the underlying infrastructure of Bitcoin, ensures that all transactions are recorded in a transparent and immutable ledger. This transparency fosters trust among users and creates a system that is resistant to tampering and alteration. This feature has attracted a wide range of users, including businesses and governments, that value accurate and tamper-proof record-keeping.
Lower transaction costs and speed (kind of…)
Blockchain offers the potential for lower transaction costs and faster processing times compared to traditional banking systems. By removing intermediaries and allowing for direct peer-to-peer transactions, users can save on fees and experience quicker transaction times (except for cases like Bitcoin when its overload makes fees insanely high). This advantage has made blockchain popular among individuals and businesses seeking efficient, cost-effective financial solutions.
Unfortunately, this breaks down with scale, as availability to handle more transactions means longer eventual consistency due to the partitioning of the data among many nodes (see the CAP Theorem).
Financial Inclusion and global reach
Blockchain as a technology and Bitcoin as an implementation have had the potential to promote financial inclusion by providing access to financial services for individuals and businesses in areas with limited banking infrastructure. Their global reach enables users to conduct transactions across borders with ease, breaking down barriers and fostering economic growth. This aspect of blockchain and Bitcoin has attracted users from diverse backgrounds, contributing to their widespread popularity.
Innovations and new applications
The popularity of blockchain and Bitcoin can also be attributed to the continuous innovations and new applications developed by many communities (Ethereum, Monero, Ada, etc.). These developments have expanded the use cases for both blockchain and Bitcoin, making them relevant and attractive to various industries and sectors. As more organizations recognize the potential benefits of these technologies, their adoption and popularity continue to grow.
Appeal to criminals and tax dodgers
It is important to acknowledge that the decentralized and pseudonymous nature of blockchain and cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin has also attracted the attention of criminals and tax dodgers. The ability to conduct transactions with a degree of anonymity and without the need for intermediaries (See Monero) has made these technologies appealing to those looking to evade law enforcement, launder money, or avoid taxes. While this aspect has contributed to the growth and support of the network, it has also raised concerns among regulators and governments about the potential misuse of the technology and how it can harm society if used without bounds.
What do they have in common?
Despite their differences, both the internet and blockchain share certain commonalities that contributed to their growth and adoption. By understanding these common factors, decentralized open-source networks like Freenet can learn valuable lessons that will help them achieve widespread acceptance and success.
- Practical applications and business cases: Both the internet and blockchain offer tangible benefits to businesses and users, which have been instrumental in driving their adoption. The internet provided a platform for companies to expand their reach and offer services to a wider audience, while blockchain provided a financial solution for users seeking an alternative to traditional banks and increased control over their assets. Identifying practical applications and use cases that cater to the needs of users and businesses is essential for any decentralized network seeking to gain traction.
- Meeting demand for change: Both the internet and blockchain emerged during times when there was a growing demand for change and innovation. The internet offered a new way to communicate and share information, while blockchain provided a decentralized financial system in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. For decentralized open-source networks to succeed, they must tap into a demand for change and offer innovative solutions that address real-world challenges, not just a hypothetical world that only a few can see.
- Ease of use and accessibility: The internet and blockchain both gained popularity because they offered user-friendly solutions that catered to a wide audience. The development of web browsers and search engines made the internet more accessible, while user-friendly wallets and exchanges facilitated the adoption of cryptocurrencies. Decentralized networks should prioritize ease of use and accessibility in order to encourage more people and organizations to adopt their technology.
- Protection of Data and IP: The blockchain, more specifically financial applications like Bitcoin, allows for the protection of the user's money in a way nobody else can tamper with. The Internet allows for the protection of the company's IP and monopoly creation, which generates more wealth for a few with enough initial wealth to build and capitalise on their ideas. Is it fair? No, never said it was.
What's Wrong With Freenet?
The term “Free” in Freenet can be easily misunderstood as referring to a "lack of cost" rather than simply "freedom to use as a common good". This unfortunate misinterpretation may result in business professionals and potential investors disregarding the project without delving deeper into its benefits and objectives.
If you have to explain, then it's wrong
Additionally, the notion of “free” is frequently linked to subpar quality, diminished value, or an absence of sound business principles, which exacerbates the scepticism surrounding the project’s viability. This unfavourable perception of the term “free” presents a considerable barrier to gaining the necessary support and investment required for widespread adoption and success.
By focusing on the project’s operational capabilities, such as messaging, horizontal scaling of infrastructure and protection of IP, rather than political ideologies like decentralization, Freenet could potentially garner more interest and support from the business community. Concentrating on these aspects highlights the practical applications and advantages of the Freenet system, emphasizing its potential for scalability, improved communication, and adaptability in various industries.
Additionally, developing a clear and concise message that conveys the project’s core values and goals will be critical in dispelling misconceptions and attracting the right audience. A strong marketing and branding strategy that focuses on the technology’s strengths and unique features, rather than relying on the potentially confusing and non-compelling terms “Free” and "Decentralised", could help reshape the project’s image in the minds of potential investors and stakeholders.
Let me elaborate on those points:
Decentralization and its Limitations
The challenges faced by Freenet, stemming from its emphasis on decentralization, serve as a cautionary tale for decentralized open-source networks. Businesses and governments were often hesitant to adopt a decentralized system, as they feared losing control or being unable to protect intellectual property. This focus on decentralization led to the alienation of potential stakeholders, preventing Freenet from achieving critical mass and ultimately resulting in its failure to gain widespread adoption.
Freenet should take note and adapt its strategies accordingly. In order to avoid a similar fate, it is essential for such networks to address the concerns of businesses and governments by highlighting the advantages of decentralization while also mitigating the perceived risks. These networks must demonstrate the potential for increased security, privacy, and reduced reliance on centralized servers, while also reassuring stakeholders about the protection of intellectual property, ability to control and overall system integrity.
You don't have to agree with any of this, it's just that we insist to continue trying to do the same thing expecting different results. Spoiler alert: you won't.
Moreover, decentralized open-source networks must strive to foster partnerships with reputable organizations, industry leaders, and government entities to boost credibility and gain support for their platforms. These alliances can help to develop industry-specific solutions and create a sense of shared responsibility and ownership, contributing to the network’s success.
Lastly, in order to increase the likelihood of adoption, decentralized open-source networks should invest in user-friendly interfaces and comprehensive documentation. By making their platforms accessible to a wider audience, they can encourage more businesses, governments, and individuals to participate, thus facilitating the growth and eventual mainstream acceptance of their networks.
Emphasizing Operational Capabilities
Freenet’s failure to achieve widespread adoption can be attributed, in part, to its focus on the political ideologies of decentralization and freedom rather than on its operational capabilities. By emphasizing these aspects, Freenet missed the opportunity to attract businesses and governments looking for scalable, efficient, and secure communication solutions. Had Freenet shifted its focus towards messaging and horizontal infrastructure scaling with a great UX, it could have demonstrated its potential to improve various industries and become as appealing to a wider audience as AWS, Azure and Google Cloud Platform.
The experience of Freenet serves as a valuable lesson for other similar decentralized open-source networks. In order to avoid the same fate, these networks should prioritize their operational capabilities and the tangible benefits they offer to potential users. By doing so, they can position themselves as practical solutions that can be seamlessly integrated into existing systems and processes. Keeping it in a technical silo alienates application developers who don't care about the inner workings of the technology to the metal and are the ones who must be using it for it to succeed.
For instance, decentralized networks can highlight their ability to provide secure messaging and data transfer solutions by emphasizing end-to-end encryption and the protection of sensitive information. By showcasing these features, they can address the concerns of businesses and governments that prioritize data security and privacy.
Additionally, these networks should emphasize their potential for horizontal infrastructure scaling, which allows for the easy addition of resources and capacity as the network grows. By promoting their ability to scale seamlessly and handle increasing workloads, they can attract organizations that require adaptable and efficient communication solutions.
Addressing Concerns about Intellectual Property and Control
Freenet’s inability to convince businesses and governments to adopt its platform can be attributed to concerns about intellectual property protection and centralized control. Modern society is built by businesses and funded by venture capital that expects a return on investment through value ownership. By failing to address these issues, Freenet limited its potential for reaching critical mass. However, had Freenet implemented measures to ensure the security and privacy of information while still preserving the benefits of a decentralized system and assurance for venture capital, it could have overcome potential resistance from stakeholders and increased its chances of widespread adoption.
Imagine, decentralized networks can introduce encryption with access control mechanisms that allow organizations to manage permissions for their data, ensuring that only authorized users can access sensitive information. By providing these control features, decentralized networks can alleviate concerns about data security and privacy, making them more appealing to businesses and governments without having each company having o reinvent their own over and over again.
Moreover, to address intellectual property concerns, decentralized networks can develop systems that enable secure storage and sharing of copyrighted material without compromising the principles of decentralization (STORJ has done some progress in this area). By showcasing their ability to protect intellectual property while still offering the benefits of a decentralized system, these networks can position themselves as practical solutions for a wide range of industries. It will also help venture capital to retain their essential IP, which they can then sell later for a high return on investment.
Collaborating with Stakeholders
Freenet’s success hinged on its ability to collaborate with various stakeholders, including businesses, governments, and users. In the past, Freenet’s efforts to engage with these groups and understand their needs and concerns were insufficient, which resulted in a platform that failed to address key requirements. This lack of collaboration ultimately hindered Freenet’s chances of achieving widespread adoption.
Learning from Freenet’s experience is crucial. Networks must prioritize collaboration with stakeholders and actively seek their input to develop a platform that caters to the needs and concerns of businesses, governments, and users alike. By fostering open dialogue and cooperation, decentralized networks can create solutions that are both technically sound and practically useful.
One way to engage stakeholders is by organizing essays, workshops, conferences, and online forums where businesses, governments, and users can provide input and share their experiences. These interactions can lead to feedback that can inform the development and refinement of features, ensuring that the decentralized network remains relevant and useful.
Additionally, decentralized networks can establish partnerships with key industry players and governments. These partnerships can help in the development of industry-specific solutions and provide access to resources that can accelerate the growth and adoption of the decentralized network. By working closely with stakeholders, decentralized networks can build a more robust and versatile platform that appeals to a wider audience.
The story of Freenet, Blockchain and the Internet provides invaluable lessons for future decentralized open-source networks aiming to achieve critical mass and widespread adoption. The key takeaway is the importance of shifting focus from political ideologies to operational capabilities, such as messaging, infrastructure scaling, and interoperability, in order to attract businesses, governments, and users.
Addressing concerns surrounding intellectual property protection, control, and collaboration with stakeholders is essential for the success of these networks. By learning from other networks' shortcomings, and advantages and emphasizing practical solutions that cater to the needs of various stakeholders, decentralized open-source networks have the potential to revolutionize industries and redefine the way we communicate and share information.
Other than that, get elected, and influence the mass to change the way business and capitalism work, and maybe we might be able to make it work the way we want to.
Until then… well… there are constraints. As good engineers, we should be working with those constraints instead of fighting them.
After all, we can change only what is within our control.
Thanks to Ian Clarke for his insightful input on this post.
1: In the case of interoperability, some work has been done to document Hypermedia later such as by Roy Fielding in his dissertation in 2001 entitled Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures, more specifically Chapter 5. However, TCP/IP and HTTP were NOT designed with interoperability for domain-specific applications in mind. HTTP has the idea of media types, but that goes as far as to document message format protocols (like text/html and application/rss+xml) and not domain-specific protocols like authentication, bookings, etc.
