I know this has been talked about before, but I did a cursory search and couldn’t find a relevant topic, so I figured I’d start a new one. It can be merged into an old one if someone knows where the previous discussion stems from.
I realize this is still a while away and can likely change, but it is my understanding that the current plan is for a series of Betas with the potential for full network resets as required, until it is deemed satisfactory, in which case, that Beta will become the “live” network. Does that mean that for all of us that intend to test the Beta, our data will be uploaded to the network essentially for free?
I imagine some balance of TestSafecoin will be distributed to testers to upload their data and perform network tasks. What then happens when the network goes live? Do the TestSafecoin balances get wiped out? What about those that were farming for the Beta? Does all their current data get wiped, as well as their farming balances? I would imagine, at the very least, that the data would not be wiped out, however, wiping out balances while not wiping out data seems to greatly disadvantage farmers for their part of the test. Keeping the data seems like a reasonable way to transition into the live network, almost necessary if we are going to have any sort of real network to display for “launch day”. However, how this balances out with who gets rewarded for their participation seems skewed.
I have limited understanding of the network but from what I do know the network creates safecoin as needed and destroys it as it is spent in return for data. If there is data already on the network that just means there is a higher demand for farmers and that more safecoin should be awarded to them to balance out the network. It would simply be a matter of rewarding farmers with real safecoin rather than testsafecoin. But then again I could be totally wrong as to my hypothosis.
Recycle** NOT destroy… I don’t know why most people talk about spending Safecoin as if you are “burning” them or “destroying” them… that is not the case, as a Safecoin in the network has the 2 attributes (owner and previous owner) or it has NO owner, but it still always exists at its location in the network. When it is farmed, it is updated with its current owner. When it is spent into the network, the Safe ID of the owner is removed, but the coin is never “burnt” or “destroyed”
These are interesting and unresolved questions AFAIK. I think one idea was that to encourage participation in tests, the network would just be declared live one day without warning - so all storage would be retained, and test Safecoin would suddenly be real Safecoin.
I still like this idea but I don’t know if that’s the plan.
This is actually not the case, anymore, as coins will no longer be objects, but simply a balance. See RFC 57, and all the discussion around that, as well as a new topic the user neo has created about it.
I agree, as it gives incentive to those who are testing, but where does this coin supply come from? Is the company going to front their coins for this? I doubt it. The fact is, the company said no additional MAID would be created so that one can buy MAID knowing that they have a specific amount of the initial share of coins. While creating SafeCoin is technically not creating MAID, the effect would be the same. People who hold MAID would see their shares diluted on launch day. That seems like a problem. At the same time, how do you reward farmers for Beta? Perhaps you only allow farmers to participate in uploading data, so that they get their data on the network for free.
I’m not 100% up on the law, especially in the UK. I could see it going two ways:
There will be some timeframe put on MAID->Safecoin conversions. The company could give users a year or two to redeem, and then the network is free to assume those coins never will be redeemed, and basically wipe them off the books.
The previous option may not be allowed by law if they are claiming to be a utility coin with real value. The law may force the company to acknowledge and receive any MAID->Safecoin transition requests in perpetuity, which would lead to there simply being a dip in the maximum total coins as some are lost forever. People believe there may be several million BTC already in this state.
I see your logic about dilution, but I think it is not strictly that. It is farming, and about providing rewards to those creating this value. Holders can participate alongside others, so they are not being disadvantaged, and it is an essential part of creating the value which investors want to see. I think it would be counter to the interests of investors not to ensure the network gets a flying start, and this seems a great way to do that - effectively you have a lot of farmers in place on day one, but if any problems occur in the run up to that (eg attacks when there are not enough farmers) the network can be reset until it reaches enough participation to withstand any attacks.
I don’t disagree with you in principle. In fact, this would almost surely benefit me as I plan to be a tester and farmer, and the network as a whole for survivability. However, I see some danger in potential lawsuits against MaidSafe if this option were pursued. I’d have to look at the statements around the ICO, and whether or not they promised a specific share of the initial amount of coins, or total coins.
one way to make sure investors in MAID did not feel their coin is getting diluted would be to let them lock it until final and in exchange receive that many test-safecoins. Then they are not missing out on the opportunity to get things saved for “free.” If they did this I don’t think anyone would be complaining they lost value of their coins if we don’t delete all the data when we hit final.
Of course the testsafecoins would have to be wiped at final and that might hurt farmers or really whoever is holding that “hot potato” when it happens. I think the key would be to get the testsafecoin on some exchanges. Then farmers would not be forced to HODL something that is eventually useless and people that wanted to could engage the risk of holding on to the hot potato.
Unless there is some really good plan that I can’t think of, I worry that there is serious chance that any sudden beta->live transition would produce too many risks and would impact testing negatively.
Would people really use the beta network as they intended if they might be spending their real safe coin? What about some algorithm glitch that rewarded some farmer absurdly or some long time backer mis-clicking and paying all their testsafecoin to upload a video or two for whatever reason… (like a pySafe bug) and haha now it’s real? And who gets to choose? I would certainly be biased towards not really uploading anything or testing any safe-consuming activities or utilities if I thought it actually may cost a part of an investment I have held for years.
What’s wrong with a test-safecoin faucet and earning via farming to get some better idea of the equilibrium involved? you need people to test the network hard in all sorts of price states to see and really work corner cases. Maybe a prize for best farmer? A prize for best uploaded data to SAFE spent ratio?
I am saying let people lock their MAID until final and get that much test-safecoin. At final the MAID gets unlocked and you can get real safecoin with it so no risk to your investment. At the same time we can see how the pressure of non-farmed coin (ie MAID that gets traded for SAFEcoin) will effect the ecosystem.
I agree that it would be problematic to have the Network launch with more coins than previously declared. It creates space for people to read into duplicitous motives (e.g. who exactly were the holders of the test Safecoin, was this a way for MaidSafe to provide access to more coins to themselves or partners, etc.). Obviously, I don’t think that would ever be the case, but markets are often unkind.
I think it would probably make sense to allow content that’s already on the Network during beta to persist in perpetuity without requirement for payment in Safecoin once the Network goes live. This could be considered a sort of marketing expense to promote adoption and usage by encouraging people to pre-seed the Network with content. Additional farmers would be more likely to join if there’s already a thriving ecosystem.
When the Network goes live, I think test Safecoin should simply vanish in terms of functionality. I think it’s only purpose should be to make sure the rails work and to illustrate what sort of returns farmers could get. At this point, when the Network is live, the purchasing of and reward for Network resources via Safecoin can begin. MAID holders can convert to Safecoin to begin utilizing their coins while farmers can begin receiving compensation via user payment and eventually the Network’s coin generation.
In this way there won’t be any dilution. Those who contributed to the Network early (either through content generation or farming) are rewarded by the fact that they received initial free storage or were set up in a position to have already familiarized themselves with farming/have more aged nodes.
I think this is also a good idea. It helps to give more real value and purpose to holding MAID, and can help to facilitate the transition from MAID to Safecoin.
I have always assumed that my maid will be converted 1-1 for safe, and any safe I farm when beta turns live would just be a bonus. Not diluted in any way by what people have farmed. I know that I bought x% of the 10% that were offered in the pre sale, which means I got an “easy way” to own that percentage of total supply without having to farm it. I never really thought it was interpreted any other way until this thread.
Just curious and not judging. I’m wondering how many people thought that’s all there would be on launch day?
IMO, coming from the Bitcoin space (and all the forks) that would help alleviate some of the “premine” stigma that the block chain guys hate. If everyone has the chance to mine some and use it while in beta, then we, the ico people, can transfer ours in after the official “it’s live” launch everyone (that participated in the beta as a farmer) has some coin to use and doesn’t have to buy it / wait to farm it to use the network. I think it would help early adoption.
What do you guys think of this idea for doing the MAID to SAFE coin exchange:
There is a function ClaimSAFEcoins(maidSourceAddress, safeDestinationAddress, amount, attestationSignature)
attestationSignature is a message signed using the private key of the source address holding the MAID. Could be a predefined message like “MAIDtoSAFE”, or some dynamic concatenation of the other 3 arguments.
When network is ready to go live, an immutable snapshot of MAID account balances at a given block is stored on the network. Storing a snapshot at a certain block # avoids the need for network participants to run a BTC node in order for new burn transactions to be verified for example, and also makes it so that the exchange doesn’t need to be done in some centralized way, like a clear net site operated by MaidSafe.
The ClaimSAFEcoins function verifies that the attestation signature is valid for the given source address. It also verifies that the amount being claimed is valid as per the snapshot, and there would also need to be a running balance of how much each address has been credited so far. I guess the section nearest to the destination address could be responsible for keeping this running balance of claimed coins?
Once elders reach consensus that the claim is valid, claimed coins balance is updated and coins are released