February 12, 2004

another trust thought

how long before someone builds the friendster version of napster? your friends get access to your files, you build a web of friends outside of that to find new connections and new music.

you trust your friends, friends-of-friends give you new connections for new opportunities. no one gets busted, unless youre dumb enough to approve someone you shouldn't trust.

evil, perhaps. but more unified then everyone running their own ftp servers.

so, who wants to pay me a million dollars for this idea? or at least build it so i can use it.

Posted by tripp at February 12, 2004 09:14 AM



Comments

this is really one step out. i mean, people already build these networks. the question is: what is a more useful network to use for file sharing: your network of friends (articlated), or a network of people created by a more system-oriented device, akin to the amazon recommedations thing. Personally, for me, file-sharing would be much better if the system articulated by network by my interests, and then I could go on to mold/shape my trusted network of file-sharers from there. Cross-referencing by interests and previous actions is better than getting access to some of the top-40 shit that some of my friends listen to. Or underworld and bad remixes, for instance :-)

Posted by: will at February 12, 2004 10:46 AM

yeah, i know its not revolutionary. but the trust bit is important right now in regards to the riaa and stuff.

a system supported device would be useful, but copyright and permissions are a lot tougher to set when youre actually sharing files.

plus, this doesnt have to be just for music. i wouldnt allow anyone access to my files, but based on a friendster type approach, you can retain control and privacy while sharing with those you know. (like making a virtual mix tape for friends kinda. maybe.)

Posted by: tripp at February 12, 2004 11:18 AM

robert mckaye (musicbrainz) did a talk on ssn+p2p filesharing @ etcon. i spoke to him afterwards and i think i convinced him that it was a bad idea. that is, the benefit of a ssn would be for collab filtering/recommendations. why risk exposure by building file sharing into that when you can just exchange the metadata and get your files regularly (of course if someone were to distribute a bridge for that software...)?

otherwise, you just spend all this time trying to come up with ways of trying to 'not get caught' which will never be successful because your biggest liability/security weakness is dumb people.

Posted by: leonard at February 13, 2004 11:37 PM