Can clients be allowed to reserve a portion of their contributions to the network to a specific application, allowing that application free storage equal to the reserved amount? I imagine that clients would still be compensated through safecoin being that they would still be contributing to the network.
I think this feature should be on the network if not already present as it allows the network to bypass having to market the network and safecoin to joe sixpack by allowing developers who’s app is in need of a database to just auto-install maidsafe unto a user’s system upon installing the dev’s program and just requiring X amount of resources to be allocated to the app’s database for the program to even run, like how I have python on my linux machine and I barely know that it’s a programming language. The relatively few people who care to actually research software can look into what maidsafe is about on their own time, instead of having to dig into maidsafe/safecoin before using SAFE programs, and friggin give a digital currency to people to use what would otherwise be free software, effectively making it paid software… ew.
Being that this feature would allow maidsafe to bypass entirely so much of the adaption process, I’m assuming that this is a thing and that I missed this somehow, right? If not, why on earth not?
So a SAFE node get’s installed as part of the software package, but only if not already installed.
I can see app stores having a SAFE category, where users have the expectation of a 100% snoop free experience. How the App developer presents the concept to the user will be interesting, I guess the new end user site should become the standard reference.
The network should ideally, be able to get folded into the existing experience as seamlessly as possible for end users.
Network should not be partial to any one application. It’s always better to see the base provide neutral support, otherwise natural evolution is inhibited.
It’s very hard to know what you’re proposing as it seems your concept of the components of the network, how they interrelate, and what they’re called, is not complete.
For instance: The Vault/Farmer process is separate and independent from the Client (End User interface). The only relationship is that your Vault sends safecoin to your End User account (not to the Client, which anyone can use to access their personal account).
A computer running a Vault will have Client software installed, but one can run a Client by itself to access the network. This is how mobile phones and other low-capacity devices will participate.
Perhaps an example will help. My current understanding is that in order for joe sixpack
to upload a video file to maidsafetube that is hosted by the maidsafe, somebody or something has to give somebody or something an amount of safecoin higher than zero, which ultimately means that joe sixpack will have to pay in the form of safecoin or some other means of compensation to upload a file to maidsafetube, as businesses always passes the cost of something down to the consumer. As far as mass adaption of maidsafe is concerned, the exact details of this doesn’t really matter. What matters is that currently youtube is free for joe sixpack (he doesn’t care about the privacy concerns) and does not require Joe to acquire new knowledge (‘sides how to navigate whatever mess youtube’s currently in), but maidsafetube currently is effectively a paid service that to even pay to use, Joe needs to now learn and understand the concept of a crypto-currency and a friggin’ new method of internet, as you can’t understand safecoin without understanding maidsafe.
My suggestion is to allow whoever or whatever is helping to provide resources to maidsafe to reserve a portion of network’s resources to a specific application, so that that application can use the aforementioned resources for free, equal to the amount of resources that the entity in question wishes to give to an application. This way, Joe doesn’t need to know about safecoin or even maidsafe to upload a file to maidsafetube. Maidsafetube need only require Joe’s computer to install maidsafe and have whatever provide resources to the network equal to the size of the files he’s uploading when he wants to upload files to maidsafetube.
Err… ignore the last reply, I apparently pressed the wrong button somewhere. That post was for fergish. As for your comment, I’m not sure how this would inhibit competition between applications. If an application is good, then the resources the application would be using would have been used up anyway without the feature that I am proposing. If an application isn’t good, then the people who stop using the program will either stop contributing resources to maidsafe altogether, in which case they more than likely weren’t sold on maidsafe and wouldn’t have be contributing anything to maidsafe without this feature, or they will keep contributing to maidsafe, which would be a win for the network.
The easiest way to accomplish this is to let users donate Safecoin to the APP, which then autonomously purchases blocks of storage for public use.
This requires the APP to behave like a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization), meaning the APP manages the public share pool, based on the rules set forth by the builder.
Now Joe can upload his cat videos for free by tapping into the (public share pool), without using Safecoin.
IMO, it is very likely people will consume the entire public share amount, and have to use their own storage later. But since the DAO APP also earns Safecoin from being popular, it may have a chance of being self-sustaining.
There is the chance that people will not come to treat safecoin as a currency, thus making them a lot less resistant to parting themselves of safecoin. Well back to reality, I’m also iffy about that solution as well. I imagine that one could limit the amount of data each user could store based on an algorithm that took into account how much safecoin was left in the bank, so I’m not that worried about that problem myself. I also imagine that early app builders will be able to get joe sixpack to give them safecoin just from raw ignorance on the consumer’s part. The problem I find with this solution is, in addition to mom and pop’s maidsafetube having to limit storage when Youtube doesn’t, is that as a consequence of the limited nature of safecoins, paying for storage this way will inevitably get harder and more unsustainable as the network matures and/or as the common user starts to treat safecoin as a currency.
My understanding is that the network rewards popular content with SAFEcoin… thus if you create something popular enough you will earn coin, not have to pay.
Perhaps oneday SAFE will be ubiquitous and fairly integrated with the packages that ISPs offer, so that it’ll be effectively free for a trial and the cost of coins included in the usual connection charges.
But according to it, nodes are rewarded safecoin in a random manner due to data, memory or processing power being provided to the network. It’s random because the algorithm splits up data and spreads it across the network. But it is the work of actual providing service to the network that earns safecoins for a farmer. Everyone can be a farmer (earn safecoin) as long as they provide more resource to the network than they use/store on it. This allows the users options based on real economics of the power that supports the network. For example, you could not contribute at all but just pay to store lots of data on the system – becoming a client only of the network. Or, you could set up lots of devices in your house and not really store data, just surf the web – you’d be mainly a provider to the network, earning some safecoin. Most people will probably be somewhere in the middle, storing some of their data on the network, providing some resource to the network. So, Mom and Pop uploading a video means they pay a little bit for the storage, but it seems they’d be earning it at a certain rate too, which would offset the cost of storage. Maybe you sometimes have to save up a little coin to upload something if you’re close to zero in your account. Anyway, I hope that someone can clarify this more.