Table of content
1 – Vision
3 – Anuvys OS, Liberty search engine and Osiris browser
5 – Decenternet Vs. Internet
Liberty search engine – Introduction
As I already explained in the first article from this subseries, Decenternet will come hand in hand with many subplatforms that aim to create the revolutionary decentralized internet together. Liberty search engine is one of them. Just like the rest, it will be funded by a portion of 10% of all the mined spyce (10% will be used for all the subplatforms, not only Liberty search engine). The whitepaper claims, that its main job is to search for the truth, not for the paid ads. Its architecture is based on an open-source and scalable system called ElasticSearch.
Anuvys OS – Introduction
Anuvys OS is supposed to be the core instrument for the Decenternet’s ecosystem. It is the first true decentralized operating system I have heard about. As the vast majority of the population uses either Microsoft or Mac (me included), the majority of the population voluntarily yields the possibility to guard their data from centralized corporations at the very root of their virtual activities. Surveillance is a thing nowadays whether people care to admit it or not. Anuvys OS plans to change that. Not only will it be for free due to the fact that it will be funded by a portion of 10% of all the mined spyce, but it will also extend the overall possible spyce that can be mined through the POR system.
Osiris browser – Introduction
Osiris browser’s importance for the Decenternet’s ecosystem eluded me for a while. I basically didn’t get the difference between it and for example the decentralized web browser I already use – Brave browser. Then at whitepaper’s page 56 it was finally stated. For those that will not be interested in running the Anuvys OS, Osiris browser will be the only tool how to access the Decenternet’s ecosystem and mine spyce. It will of course also use a portion of 10% of all the mined spyce for its development. It will therefore also be for free.
Quotes – Mass adoption: Liberty search engine (chapter 4):
“The autonomous decentralized funding system effectively eliminates the necessity of monetizing the Liberty search engine”
This is an extremely important. I actually proved in my thesis, that this fact ALONE will reduce the information overload, which is being unnecessarily caused by the very tools that should only be reducing it – the search engines. The problem here is that in order to fund Google, we have to yield our data. When we yield our data through Google, we automatically give them to wealthy corporations that can influence ads and information we see, thus forcing our attention to “deviate from the original plan” (the best case scenario lol).
I only fear one thing. The 10% of all the mined spyce is supposed to fund everything on the site. What if the adoption will be slow? What if the prize will be low due to low demand at the beginning? How will those subplatforms be funded at the early stages when the need for funds will be the biggest? Is there any plan B? They seem like a very important part of the whole platform and the lack of funds could spell doom to the project.
„Liberty is simply designed to fulfill one simple purpose: to speak the truth. When you type “sexy shoes” it will fetch the content with the most popular demand first. It doesn’t bring you the content with the most ad clicks.“ That is supposed to be achieved through: „An autonomous jury-duty-like voting system for filtering out content of extreme negativity from the Decenternet.“
This will probably be an evergreen of the article, but there is simply not enough technical information. I will explain the reason now and will further refer to the problem in this article as a “safety protocol”. Decenternet’s team obviously means it with the project and they extensively guard the technical information. That is totally understandable and worthy of our respect. There also are accompanying negative aspects of this decision though. Essential question here would imo be “How will the relevance be measured?” If one doesn’t have the answer to this essential question, one is only left with the fact that there will be no centralized authority in control of the search engine. That is good, but from my point of view not good enough.
In my bachelor’s thesis I brainstormed about possible usage of “digital pheromones” in a digital environment explained in a paper called “An ant-colony based approach for real-time implicit collaborative information seeking“. As a mental exercise I recommend reading the paper and trying to realize what exactly makes it a bit centralized (or maybe just ineffective when getting to know the subjective relevance is the goal) and what could be changed to make it decentralized (or effective. It would depend on the underlying code to decide whether it is (de)centralized, which is not provided in a philosophical text). As it is the last subchapter of the thesis, I don’t want to rip it from its context and speak about it now. If you want to know my opinion about that stay in touch (I hate duplicated information :D…sorry)! Otherwise read the paper:).
Quotes – Anuvys OS (chapter 7):
“Did you know that the intermediaries who owns the traditional centralized internet infrastructure know everything there is to know about you? Looking into this issue, one may say they are just collecting your data for commercial purposes. As you find out what information they claim ownership over, you may begin to see why automated mass surveillance of this kind can pose substantial risks that hands over the control over the population to the few.“
It is important to realize that everything that is centralized potentially grants data about you to someone you don’t trust. Operating system is no exception of course. It would be naïve to think that they only use your data with your best interest on their mind. One can either choose to believe that the authorities won’t misuse the data, or one can also use Blockchain. Remember that if you use an application and it’s in the hands of someone you don’t mutually trust with others that use the same application YOU NEED A BLOCKCHAIN. OS is not an exception.
“They are already able to effectively point out automatically potential leaders among social groups effectively eliminating them even before they become a threat to their system of control. They can promote and simulate whatever agenda they would want the mass population to be driven to. They could manage the mentality, movement, quality, and quantity of the population like cattle.“
This is a proven fact in countries like China. Often times I hear opposing arguments like “but those countries are shit. That would never happen in our country”. Well... I beg to differ:). It can happen to any country in a matter of one single “democratic vote/elections ”.
“However, in order to truly free ourselves from the chains of enslavement that hold us from reaching our true potential, let us opt out and support a new operating system which is supported by the people, the highly incentivized spyce economy, and the Liberty SE to keep it free from dictators who disguise themselves as sheep. There’s no need to protest, riot, or convince your politicians. There’s no need to express any more anger and frustration toward anyone or anything any longer.“
I’m more than willing to try:).
“However, it may be useful to remember that the Anuvys OS can multi-boot by default. This means that there’s no need to stop using your traditional surveillance OS suddenly. It will remain intact if you wish it to. For instance, you may continue to use Windows for gaming and Anuvys OS for all other purposes. Please refer to the technical white paper for more details on the Anuvys OS.“
This is an extremely important notion. Lot of possibly important application (like games for me!) probably wouldn’t be compatible with the Anuvys OS. The fact that it can multi-boot is a huge boost to its usability imo!
Due to the ”safety protocol” a lot of technical information cannot be found in the whitepaper. I would recommend creating a whitepaper v. 2.0.0. as soon as the information is disclosed. Since the whitepaper would have over 100 pages, my previous recommendation of creating a document solely concentrating on the ”Vision” still stands.
If you’re interested in the technical information you can always ask for it on the Telegram, but you will need to sign a non-disclosure agreement. It will update you a bit about the technical side of the project, but lot of the information is either non-existent yet, or highly protected from the general public.
What I lacked the most was at least some technical data about the Liberty search engine. As an information scientist (and someone who also wrote about possible decentralized search engines in his bachelor’s thesis), I was a bit disappointed with the information provided about that particular part of the project. There is a lot to speak about, yet what I got was again what I would call an ideological rant – “It will search for the truth”. Shame. The Osiris browser was then only mentioned in the whitepaper (it didn’t have its chapter/subchapter, and there was almost no factual information about it apart from the fact that it will be vital for connection to the Decenternet without the Anuvys OS. I though firmly believe that more factual information will be revealed when the product will be (almost) ready.
Lear more at
- Malizia, A, Olsen, K, Turchi, T, & Crescenzi, P 2017, 'An ant-colony based approach for real-time implicit collaborative information seeking', Information Processing & Management, 53, 3, pp. 608-623, Library & Information Science Source, EBSCOhost
- Decenternet’s Whitepaper
Information Overload and Methods of its Elimination in the Modern Information Society (Thesis I referenced in the text...it is not fully translated yet)