Unless reverse-exponentials (called “asymtopes”, right?) are used, like they are in many other parts of the network
We can keep paying out smaller and smaller amounts of Safecoin. But then we have the “low hanging fruit” situation. Those who got in early get the most benefit.
I’m not against early adopter advantages. I’m trying to foster “continuous” economic growth, using a near infinite resource to deal with an infinite demand.
How would SAFE GB function? I keep hearing about it but have no idea what it is.
Here’s the original post detailing the idea.
So the network would pay in SAFE GB and users could us SAFE GB to store data on the network or trade it for fiat?
Would SAFE GB be infinitely inflationary and SAFE coin would remain a store of value with deflation?
Edit: sounds like the best of both worlds.
PtP (Apps and Content) reward = SAFE GB
Farmers (Vaults) reward = Safecoin
Exactly as you stated.
This sounds to good to be true. Makes both the inflation and deflation camps happy. As a hard core deflation store of value anti theft advocate, I love this idea.
Would SAFE GB be recycled or destoryed when spent?
If SAFE GB is used to store data on the network then what would Safecoin be used for? Or would both be able to store data?
Yes, technically it is consumed when used to PUT data on the SAFE Network. But if used to transfer value between two people, it remains until consumed.
Safecoin would act like gold and SAFE GB would act like paper fiat money.
Safecoin = Gold (hard to grow)
SAFE GB = Food (easy to grow)
I don’t think it’s like that at all, it just means that content earns less over time.
So content rewards have an ebb-and-flow lifetime, in a very natural way. Like, they are first uploaded, get the majority of their GET rewards, and it kind of trickles off after that.
and then new content is uploaded, and has its lifespan, and so on and so on.
It’s how the internet pretty much works already, just look at reddit.
I don’t see how “getting in early” has anything to do with it. It’s just the natural flow of content on the internet. New content is Born, has life, then slowly dies off (but never completely does, cause SAFE:)
I don’t get the need for a SAFEgb thing
I see many artists that would not benefit at all from “SAFE GB”. They basically only use the internet for some surfing, and uploading their art. SAFE GB would be worth little to them and only a small portion of it would pay for their Art through uploads of future Art being pre-paid. Being inflationary it would be reducing value too if not somehow transferred to a more suitable spending medium quickly.
SAFEcoin is designed to promote recycling. If $$ price gets high (when scarce) then people will sell it to those PUTting. When SAFEcoin is divided then where is the need for SAFE GB?
I can see the use of SAFE GB and some great advantages, BUT as payment to those creators who only store their Art for public consumption, I can see those people saying WHY? And we want those thousands of Artists
As SAFEcoin becomes more difficult to get, then the $$ price rises accordingly, so really that extra benefit is not that great. Also why shouldn’t early adopters get some benefit for building the appeal of the network.
Then we still need coin divisibility for micro transactions at the shops, buying that Gum. The shop owner isn’t going to take GB storage rights, is he?
No solution is perfect, but they would be able to use SAFE GB because they can convert it to Safecoin or fiat. They don’t have to use it for storage.
True, but they would need to do it quickly to maintain value. But it is another step in the process and their payments for their art is not available until they do the exchange. Maybe when payment APPs are developed to simplify paying the shop keeper those APP could perform the exchange from SAFE GB into coin to cover the payment to the store keep.
But the question I have is that when safecoin is worth a lot more then divisibility will have been introduced to cover the low price items in the food shop for example. And then is the need for SAFE GB there any more?
Don’t get me wrong, I am divided on this solution, I can see a lot of advantages, but also disadvantages and its more than just cannot please all the people all the time. Also is it just going to be a stop gap measure that only delays SAFE cents (or mSAFE) being introduced
Maybe not. Either way, it increases flexibility, and enables PtP and really tiny micropayments from day 1. Devs can choose either currency depending on their needs.
Unfortunately its not an addition of a few lines of code to enable like PtP in SAFEcoin is. So I guess it needs evaluation, say a RFC.
And the question of confusion for artists and other non technical people who get paid in SAFEcoin for some things and SAFE GB for others. It does raise the bar for Artists and their adoption of SAFE for distributing the Art, they have to at least understand their payments.
Most of it will be needed already (because this is how you purchase safe storage - you buy SAFE GB which is then used up over time). I agree “needs discussion” (yes to RFC), but I don’t believe it is a difficult thing to implement.