Speculation about another split is starting, bitcoin is a great proof of concept technology and has made great inroads in to experimenting how society accepts crypto technology. It has demonstrated that there is demand for secure interaction.
How to solve all of bitcoins problems? I don’t think you can, it’s a heavy giant - its cache and history folder is full and can not be cleaned out, even when it splits it takes its junk folder with it. It’s got too many user accounts and they are all attempting to log in at the same time, but can’t. Which is why transactions are sloooooowwwwww.
I believe more than ever SAFE is going to appear just in time just as bitcoin cracks up, it’s already cracked in to two pieces and more bitcoins shards are on the way.
SAFE is going to empty the crypto recycling bin, defrag the crypto experience, clear the cache, wipe the history and turn on full incognito mode. Full OS upgrade.
Here is an article going over why bitcoin may split again and its weaknesses.
Let it split 5 times over. That way it will be less dominant. We just need to get MAID off there and onto our network. Divorce could not come soon enough.
I know right? I hate the fact that the token coin is on the omnicoin protocol
It’s what we had at our disposal at the time, but man I’d even take a WAVES asset or … god forbid a bancor token over omnicoin.
There are a couple limitations in our data. Most importantly, each address can represent more than one individual person. An obvious example would be a bitcoin exchange or wallet, which hold the currency for a lot of different people.
Another limitation has to do with anonymity. If you want to remain completely anonymous, you can use something called CoinJoin, a process that allows users to group similar transactions together. This makes it seem like two people are using the same address, when in reality they are not
The other problem with such an analysis is the huge number of use once addresses that many could easily hold amounts that the user discarded. They may discard an amount that is less than the fees required to send it.
My view would have been to make an analysis that removed any address with less than a predetermined amount. EG 0.00001000. How many of the above include say omni-protocol addresses with 0.00000575 BTC required to carry the omni transaction.
Thus its likely that nearly 95% of address would be removed. This would mean that 0.0176% of addresses own 17.49% of BTC.
Then they need to remove the addresses held by exchanges and any addresses that have not been transacted for a number of years since they are most likely lost accounts. A couple of well known addresses from the creators of BTC are likely either lost or will never be accessed again.
Thus its likely that 0.0176% owning 17.49% becomes 0.0176% own less than 5%
I think this is bigger than most people realise. There are plenty of stories of people who lost thousands of BTC when it was fairly worthless. Most of the coins were mined in the early days and a quick look at how many of those addresses have not been accessed since 2012 says it all really imo.
I’ve noticed two constant threads across the internet on bitcoin:
Right when the market peaks there is someone saying it’ll be some obnoxious number and “buy while you can” platitudes.
When the market has any down turn there is someone being chicken little panicked or excited that it will break.
This is simple economics happening at a speed not possible prior to the internet and millions having instant access. It would shock the economy if it did collapse, destroy all cryptos credibility (especially small coins like safe coin) and probably bring the rents down in the Bay Area (wishful thinking). We shouldn’t hope for that. Cryptocurrency is like the tide, as it goes up we all do but we aren’t going down separately.
SAFE coin still doesn’t exist, as far as I know… For now it’s Maid-coin (mad coin misspelled he he he) . In any case SAFE net, most importantly and safe-coin are something completely different. Nothing for big speculators anyway. It’s about a safe network and a really interesting “democratic” implementation (I believe) that will allow to participate rather than to earn for sharing space and the network.
Still a new in the forum so be kind and tell me if I misunderstood the overall idea. In any case and even if it will split again Bitcoin is here to stay. The last split didn’t do any harm in fact and added some value.
I’ll follow and participate as much as I can and I’d like to see alpha 4 and possibly a beta
Since SAFE coin will be tied to the price of data storage and the coins will be linked to the going rate of farming, could SAFE coin ever take off in the way bitcoin has? Meaning investors decided to invest in bitcoin as a tried and true method of storing wealth but would the price of SAFE coin be more closely tied to the going-rate of data storage? Not sure if this question makes sense but I feel the two coins satisfy different niches and am not sure if SAFE would be seen as a coin in the same way. I’m also aware that the overall numbers of coins makes a difference.
It seems you have applied the wrong conclusions and limited the basis.
The coin truly is used to pay for network resources and is used to pay farmers. This is the network economics and the price in safecoin (not $$$) of resources is determined by spare resources.
The human economics is not necessarily tied to anything specific. Yes there will be a base price that the coin should not go below and that is a premium on storage costs. But because the coin can be speculated, can be used as a form of instant, fee less payments, can be used for micropayments means that it is not tied to storage costs.
They are very different beasts really, but yes, imo it could take off in a more serious way. Velocity of money is critical to driving economic growth. Deflationary assets (hard money like gold or BTC) tend to slow down the velocity as they increase in value over time and therefore have a high ‘hold’ incentive. This is part of the reason I don’t see BTC as currency and I suspect all attempts to make it replace fiat currency (soft money) will fail. A deflationary asset will always be volatile and bad for budgeting your business or your weekly shop, the velocity of it will also always be low as users tend not to want to part with it when they know it will keep rising in value.
Societies work much better when they have easy access to both hard and soft money. As Simon Dixon likes to say, BTC is like your savings account, you dip in and out of it and you add to it over time, but when it comes to daily-spending you need soft, stable money too.
BTC has exploded in value because it is the perfect deflationary investment and it started from nothing, so the initial phases of growth are necessarily huge. Some people do use BTC as currency out of necessity (like Venezuelans and the online black markets), but broadly speaking most of us don’t like to spend our BTCs because they go up in value.
SafeCoin is a very interesting proposition. It is a kind of hard money. It’s backed by real-world resources, deflationary/limited in supply etc. However, SafeCoin’s unique utility is broader than that of BTC. Anyone who wants to use the network MUST burn their coins to do so, and if anyone can earn small amounts of coin for free then we can see how there might be a greater tendency to spend and increase velocity for a utility than with a simple investment asset like BTC.
I suspect SafeCoin will have an inverse relationship to BTC in terms of how it is used. My guess is most will ‘use’ their small amount of (free) coins and they will have a high velocity and help improve the SAFE economy. A smaller proportion of the whole is likely to be ‘invested’ as a hard asset imo (although of course there will be plenty of investors just as BTC has plenty of users).
I think the focus on utility and the higher percentage of users to investors will have a really positive effect on SafeCoin personally. Despite being a deflationary asset it should behave like soft money in some ways. I imagine it will be a little more stable in the longer term and it should reach a critical mass much sooner than BTC. With a high velocity it could help sustain a really thriving economy without needing the pyramid scheme investment that BTC required. I don’t need to buy-in to SAFE to increase the value of the network or coins. As soon as I start farming I have added the value of my spare resources. So, if SAFE can really monetise a lot of spare capacity, create a thriving internal economy with high velocity of money, and satisfy investor desire for deflationary investment and a store of value, well then, I’d say SafeCoin at least has the potential for quicker and more sustained growth (less volatile in terms of downswings if backed by more utility than speculation) than BTC ever had.
Very interesting post from Jabbers, lots to chew on there. This really leaped out at me. Very good point:
Also worth noting, you will probably have to acquire a small stake to join, eg pay a SafeCoin to create an account. This also drives farming adoption / adds value to the network.
Indeed, it seems safe coin is the future. The creation of bitcoin was truly revolutionary, but safe has the ability to take things to a completely new dimension.
Currently, individuals can buy a myriad of cyber currencies to offer themselves an alternative store of wealth. However, the best way to store this wealth is to have the keycodes for the wallets stored someplace outside the reach of another (including hackers). Imagine the potential that the safe network will bring. Instead of storing one’s keycodes on a thumb drive or in a computer, a person could save the codes on the safe network. All you would then need is access to a computer with the maid safe client and your memorized password and you could gain access to all your encrypted keycodes from the network.
What does this mean? Your memorized password is all you need to travel anywhere in the world to have access to your “bank”. Once you have converted your assets into digital currency and saved your addresses and keycodes onto the safe network, all you need is the password in your head to unlock it. You can travel anyplace on earth with only a password in your head to literally move your wealth. That will bring great value and demand to the safe network, which in turn will increase the value of safe coin…to the moon…eventually.
There is still risk - if your computer has malware installed that monitors keystrokes etc, you could still have everything compromised. My understanding is that a hardware wallet would prevent this problem because the hacker is not capable of entering the code displayed on the external device?
However, I agree generally with what you said, using SAFEnet would be a security improvement over what people have available now . .
