The concept of publishers can be a MAJOR incentive for this project to be accepted by the information related industries.
We have a real, huge potential in every single industrial field related to content providing. We can easily attract film industries, music industries, game industries, ISPs, advertisers, news agencies, non-profit organizations, individual content creators and much more. The possibilities are so huge that they are almost unimaginable at this point in time. We have the ability to finally change the entire copyright system - forever.
There are two things that can happen when this project gets off of the ground:
a) Bitcloud could become another geek p2p protocol that is only used by people that won’t contribute to our economy. b) Bitcloud could go mainstream. It could be the next revolution as iTunes was to the music industry. If we succeed, we are talking about the “entire world” using our system to interchange information, trade information, and correctly categorize information.
If you look at current p2p systems, specially Kademlia (eMule), the search results are a total mess. Repeated content, corrupted content, fake content, incorrectly categorized content, illegal content, etc. It is absolutely crucial that we design Bitcloud in a way that prevents these things from happening. By using publishers, we will be avoiding some of these issues that because the publishers are actually human beings looking for good quality.
Bitcloud is constructed by the integration of an inter-dependant chain of modules and plugins, each one having its own BCL (laws).
For example, there are the fundamental modules of routing, storage, and goverment. From there on, a complete set of plugins can be constructed.
Each plugin will allow publishers to create sub-nets. In the case of the cloud module (the first and most important one) the publishers create a sub-net with only the content moderated by them. Collaboration between publishers is possible.
Examples:
- Cloud plubishers: a publisher does have a collection of files approved. For example, a film company, a music store, a software provider, etc.
- A social plugin, like Facebook, Twitter, or Google+. Any publisher will have an independent social sub-net, so it is possible to create different social nets each one specialized under the rules of the particular publisher.
- A wiki plugin. Each publisher will have and moderate its own wiki.
- A forum plugin. Each publisher will moderate and establish the rules of his own forum.
- A market plugin. Each publisher will be in charge of one store or collection of stores and will moderate sellers and customers.
Now, the important thing to remember here is that nodes CAN select any publishers as they wish, and optimize the space and resources for THOSE publishers. Publishers can pay the nodes or make contracts, or some nodes can just be owned by the pusblishers.
Also, publishers act as escrow agents to facilitate transactions between the consumers of the content and the nodes when there are some paid services that need to be made.
In this model, all content is encrypted both for transit and encrypted by a nonce key until payment is verified by the escrow agent; at which time, a key exchange mediated by the publisher occurs, the content is unlocked and the node receives payment.
Publishers have a toolset allowing them to automatically track whether content has been delivered, whether payment has been completed, and automatically notify both parties to a transaction that it has been completed successfully.
The possibilities are endless. We can virtually replace every single major layer of the actual Internet in a decentralized way by using this system containing publishers.
How can a company or corporation want to enter into ourstructure if they Can’t moderate and take control of the content they provide? This is why we propose the Publisher System.
- Low quality content: repeated with small variation, corrupted, illegal, incorrectly categorized, etc.
- Sometimes, specially for non-profit organizations, their content will not be ranked apropiatelly and cannot compete against stupid videos which are less important for humanity but most fool people want to see, so they will be removed when space is over. Most artists will be against this too.
- You are now centralizing power in botnets that will constantly going to be run to rank certain videos, and consume most of the bandwidth resources.
- No motivation for artists and industries to enter a non-moderated system with low quality.
- There could be legal issues because all nodes can be blamed to contain parts of illegal content (it doesn’t matter if they are stored encrypted because the content is plublicily accessible anyway).