About the possible existence of multiple SAFE Networks

At the moment, I think this is very likely to happen. As in nature, we have different species of birds. This will be good for our species as a whole. Some safe nets will be significantly different from others. In the long run the good safe nets will survive and it is possible to have 1 dominant safe net. But given that people live in different places and share different values, I don’t think there will ever be just 1 SAFE network.

1 Like

Makes sense but also devalues the initial iteration (Monetarily) and also feels super unlikely that we ever reach full supply or need to even have that large of a supply.


It is very likely that you will be able to claim your MAID in most SAFE networks, so the initial investors will be more than happy…



I’m not totally clear on what you mean by your ‘other vault’, but there is opportunity cost if you are farming on the network that isn’t the most profitable. It would be best to have both vaults participating in or queued to participate in the most profitable network.

1 Like

I learned some new stuff this evening. Thank you

1 Like

The vault is a software and configuration file. I can have 100 vaults placed on my server with different configuration files leading to different networks. If I am a farmer in 1 network and I am accepted in another network I can:

a) kill my old vault, because in the new network I will make more money;

b) kill the new vault because I make more money in the old network and restart it to wait again to connect to the new network

Ahahaha not me. I plan to advertise SAFE. There will be enough “forks” without me. You can say that I am a SAFE Maximalist. I want SAFE to succeed, even at my expense.

Of course, I prefer the MaidSafe SAFE network to succeed too, because I have shares in the company + I have given them a loan and I want to see a return on my money. :wink:

You can even say that the first fork was the forum community network… It is very likely that the first fork with safecoin will be it too :wink:


Very interesting reading today…

Okay, you made me believe there will be many SAFE Networks, not just one. Where I try to follow up is how can we increase the probability current MAID holders are not screwed and are not forced to choose only one (possibly failing) network? As discussed elsewhere, claiming Safecoin by sending to a burning address would be a disaster in that sense…

A good solution could be making a snapshot of MAID holdings. If SAFE Network 1 fails, another future snapshot could decide what every MAID holder gets in the SAFE Network 2. That way MAID could be traded as an independent valuable asset even after the launch of the first network.

Avoiding claiming by sending to burn address seems pretty antifragile to me. Any flaws in my thinking?


Yes friend, I think MAID has a great future. And not only because it will be able to claim a new safecoin in new forks, but also because it is fully traceable on the bitcoin network. A large company that wants Safecoin is more likely to buy a “virgin” MAID for claiming “virgin” Safecoin…


I would say multiple SAFE networks have been on the team’s radar for a while afaik, and according to the website (can’t find the link rn, but might try in a moment) mentions using separate SAFE networks coexisting internally as well for testing features, etc. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is mentioned in a design doc or whitepaper somewhere addressing what the original ideas were regarding dealing with multiple networks.

I think I see what you mean in terms of “it’s good for the species as a whole,” if you mean that it provides more staying power of SAFE as a concept if there are multiple, but I don’t see this being desirable as opposed to one network. Perhaps analogous to wanting to go to the grocery store, but some systems of roads are not connected, so even if there’s a store I want to go to, I can’t get there. My assumption is the networks aren’t interoperable. You mentioned they could be, but could lead to a situation like a “great firewall” that locks off entire safe networks from others, and we’re back to square one

1 Like

I would imagine, most forks ( if thats what you wish to call them ), will not honour that part, and would alter the code to have 4.2bill still to issue, or some other adjusted number.

1 Like

It is desirable because Bitcoin had 2 inflation bugs, imagine what would happen if there was 1 network and a bug was found that destroyed it? Isn’t it better for our species not to start from 0, but to have a well-developed alternative available? 1 network = single point of failure…

I imagine 1 vault software that can connect to different networks as torrent clients work with several trackers simultaneously. You cannot block a Safe Network without blocking all IPs in it. If the network is small, then you will be able to block it, yes.

Why didn’t so many of the currencies in the top 10 start from 0 but as a fork of Bitcoin, in which people who have Bitcoin also receive from the new currency? Because when you make a new coin, you don’t want to start at 0. You want people who have money to have your coin, because a percentage of them will buy more from your coin.

1 Like

I don’t think it’s a good comparison, personally. A better comparison would be the WWW.

Would people suddenly move to a fork of the web because of a bug in only one portion of the system, if it meant that none of the data on the original web would be accessible? None of their existing relationships, identities, history, search queries etc if they weren’t interoperable? ? All that fragmented data!

Given how reticent people are to leave a social network, for example, will give you some indication of the difficulties of promoting a fork once once network is established.

If you look at it purely from a farming or token point of view, it seems simple, but that is only one component to the system as a whole.

And remember, the network is being designed to be incrementally improved as time goes on!


Entirely different scenario.

With btc, they forked, so the block chain held data pre fork was available on the new fork.

With safe network, they are not really forking, no data on the old network will be present on the new one.
Unless of course all public data is downloaded and uploaded to new one, but thats still not all data.


Also, block chains are public ledgers, it is easy to see who has what and reproduce it by a copy.

I don’t think with our privacy that would even be possible, but could easily be wrong on that.


Is it possible to have a vault that reads information from 1 Safe Network and writes information to another? And a browser to communicate with this vault?

What you say is true. That’s why I’m talking about MAID, not safecoin :wink:

1 Like

You can’t read pvt data.

Who would pay for the upload.

1 Like


You could have an app that effectively copied and pasted public data from one to another. But it’d not be a functional duplication/fork of the network, and I’m not sure how useful it would be TBH.


I guess there are a lot of different cases.

But if I was gonna do that, and was not a maid holder, I would not honour the maid.

When mastercoin ( omni ) came out this happened, and many other projects.

1 Like