If it’s too bloated someone might repost it in reduced size, so you can’t go too crazy on this.
Most non-video content will fit in one block (1MB, IIRC) so if your eBook is 800KB going for a slightly bloated 1.01 MB could be Sales 101, so to speak.
1 Like
Farmers expenses are real – Hard drives, bandwidth electricity. Artists rewards are Gravy… Once they have recorded a song and digitalized it for transimssion, and paid their PUT fee… There isn’t going to be any ongoing expense…
As @janitor just noted though, if it’s one chunk (for a book), you’re expenses (1mb free) are essentially negligible (that’s the point of SAFE, no? Using space that’s just lying around anyway). So I don’t buy that argument.
10% for making a thing.
90% for sharing some stuff you didn’t even realise you had lying around on the computer/phone you’re using anyway…
I’m saying this because I think an inbuilt content reward is an amazing thing that could bring a lot( lot lot lot ) of people to the network if we get it right…
1 Like
Is one block/chunk 1 meg (are they the same things?) ? I thought everything was split no matter how large…? I was just thinking the bigger it is: the more chunks: therefore the more GETs…
But what you say makes sense, indeed.
Yes, but if the farmers turn off their machines the whole thing goes kaput.
We are building a network. The network is what is most important. The content will use the network because it is efficient and secure… But the network is FAR more important than the content.
1 Like
Again. One of the selling points of SAFE is utilising space on your machine at home. That you use anyway. There will be commercial farmers, sure. But leveraging unused space and resources is (I understand), one of the main aims (up there with privacy). So there will be no off if we have normal (non commercial farmer) people on the network.
There is no network without content.
1 Like
Not really true. Many files may not be shared publicly.
Remember that we are storing at least 4 copies of everything at any given time. Hopefully much of that is duplicate copies so it will equalize out. Non-persistant vaults mean that data is traveling in and out using bandwidth all of the time. Those are things that people may be charged for.
The internet doesn’t pay much for content but people still provide it… If SAFE can deliever it faster, more reliably and with less storage and hosting costs, people will use it whatever the “artist reward” is, or even if there is not a reward…
Right.I still don’t buy these charges are in any way significant for most people giving up a few megs of HDD. 4 chunks or no. It’s all just leftovers, so again. Why the 1/9 split? I don’t see a valid reason for it…
Exactly why if SAFE gets it right it would be a great boon to the service, because there is very little cost. Yes 10% is something. But I don’t see it as being fair compared to most resource sharing (especially imagining a very large network with a lot of large device on it… a few years away perhaps).
Storage and bandwidth are not a problem today. They will become only less costly. Content. Again. Is something worth something. Especially in such a seamless environment where there are no worries paypal etc.
If we get content providers on the network. We get a lot of their followers too.
10% of network fees doesn’t seem justified (imagining OC), and given the abundance of space etc. Farming is passive. Creating is not.
All in all, I think @dirvine is right. It would be best to make it dynamically calculated… (But that is hard)
The network needs to have ample resources as far as bandwidth and storage etc… Whatever portion needs to be allocated to insuring that ought to be first priority.
Paying core developers and key app developers ought to be secondary…
Paying artist and media content providers would be a really good bonus if and as much as the network could afford it, but this is less critical.
I would love for local newspapers and media to be revitalized by SAFE. They have been rather crippled by the internet and the fact that you can’t drop a quarter or two into a internet newspaper machine… I think SAFE can fix this…
2 Likes
Than what are you asking for?
P.S.
You should add some more value to your reply next time to keep the discussion going.
Heh I would say 10% is way too much - unless there is a way to protect original creator against reproducing its content I see a problem. Say you are good at making videos but suck at marketing which I am good at so you throw your content out there hoping the crowd picks it up, I copy your stuff put my address on it and squeeze all the juices out of it - now sure you can make your address known and recognised plus somekind of timestamp…but it’s way too much hassle imo. I see this pay to producer proposal introducing a lot of bloat and junk to the network - I imagine a copies of the same somewhat popular content hunting for your GETs everywhere where one can post content freely. The question is whether 10% will be enough to pay for pirated PUT as next copy somehow dilutes profit for all parties involved including original creators… Well one thing is certain the bigger the pay the producer cut the bigger is the chance of a content to be pirated
Edit: forgot the solution… 
Dapps will take care of it. Dapps were you can set a certain price for you piece of work. That doesn’t solve pirating problem but I atleast this way a pirate pays you first 
then again I think that it’s easier for an dapp to gain recognition than for individual
money is bad and has nothing to do with freedom, in my opinion. money attracts bad actors of all kind. i don’t want to think of child porn that earns big incomes as being an ‘intelectual property’ of some kind of artist. i stand by my view in which a limit per income and transactions and split of surplus would be better.
anyway it would end, i have trust that the developers will chose the right way to go
Unless something has changed, block/chunk is the same and is currently 1MB. If you post more, then that’s chunked (split in to 1MB chunks).
Each chunk, even if there’s only 1, is replicated several times (which is where the farmer lottery comes in - the block needs to get several non-cached read requests in order for all the replicas to receive at least 1 request. In theory you can get 0 hits for reads if the file is never read after being posted.
I also don´t think a 10% cut or any type of static cut is in any way fair, particularly since it won´t reward creators, but only uploaders. It is obvious what would happen: People copy viral content, slightly change it to duplicate and then hope to generate income. Happened often on Youtube with the slight difference that YT may take videos down if there is copyright infringement. I don´t believe that the YT model is in any way perfect, since YT reacts to flags based on economical relevance and charges a huge cut.
The problem with digital products is that you don´t really charge the work, you charge a small part of the work, hoping that you will receive a nice revenue or at least whatever you paid into it. So if we´re honest selling records is much like crowdfunding, only that you don´t know how much you´ll get and people may spoil your campaign by making your content accessible to everyone before you reached your goal. That´s what actually happened when people taped your song on the radio and it went on steroids when people could do it on the net with basically no loss. To sell a digital product like a material product you´d need to do it via subscription/crowdfund models.
I wonder if this could be done without a thirdparty right on the SAFE network by dynamically charging GETrequests
i.e. you produced an Album for 2,000,000 safecoin excluding your individual work. Now you want to sell it for 3,000,000 safecoin. You load the album onto SAFE and encrypt it with 5000 multisigkeys and charge 400 safecoin for each GETrequest. When the network reaches 5000 GET requests the files are encrypted and turn into public domain. Those who want to pay the creator afterwards will know what a fair price is (following the requirements of the author). Also, those who decide to pay for your work are likely to advertise your content on their social network before reaching the goal, since they lose their money otherwise.
This doesn´t really solve the problem that anyone can take your content and use it without crediting you, but it would at least provide a model that allows content creators to sell their work comparable to material goods without needing a third-party involved while having 100% control of price.
2 Likes
i don’t consider myself an artist, even if i make some media files from time to time. but i’m far from an artist. i definetly know the work implies a lot of work. a lot. not to mention talent. but the problem is that the artist wants to be paid for the work he produced as long as his work is alive. this is a major problem. if you construct a museum, you get payed just one time, not every time a person visits that museum. digital artists tend to always run after the money. i know it is a one shot bullet, then your data gets copied. i always see this kind of problem just like a concert: you make a song, give to the public a part of it, like a demo. then you think of a price for your work. a one time selling of that song. (because you record it only once). after that you wait until x amount of people put down their money so the money raised is now equal with the sum that you wanted. then release the song and never get upset if it’s copied.
this is how i see it. and i may not be a full time artist, but i have the utmost respect for artists and their work, and i dislike piracy as long as the artists understand they cannot milk the cow forever for a one-time work that has to have a price once it’s finished. a value. once the value is reached, then the value it’s gone
The “problem” is not that the artist wants to be paid as long as his work is alive, the “problem” is that media products suffer from inflation whereas material products cannot (yet) duplicate and even if they could (3D printing) one would need to cover the material cost, which in case of media products is insanely small.
Point is that people prefer to pay as if the ideas that made the product possible didn´t exist. I come from an artist family and have a lot of friends who are artist. When I go to a vernissage with non-artist friends I often heard people say “Wow, 200 bucks? I could do that as well in only 5 minutes” which is wrong, because they cannot unthink the idea and calculate time again.
As I said, I think that selling products as if it was crowdfunding is one way to tackle the issue, but in some cases it might not apply and there need to be other solutions to protect artists to be reduce to the results and not compensated for the work that was needed to create. The same goes for scientific findings and inventions.
A photocopier can not counterfeit-copy right material for resale like a book, because it is said each print has very small pattern where it can traced back to whom purchased the machine. Just like a unique qr code.
Is this where maidsafe is going with watermarks where if data is copied and put on the network, there is no advantage because the watermark points to the creator address and awarded the 10% for the app or the content.
That’s a very nice explanation, but I can take a screenshot of each page of your e-book, and then put all of them together in a new PDF. Without the pattern.
Can confirm.
Source: I’m a gamer 
1 Like
As a side note to update your knowledge on the “watermarking” of photocopies/printers
From my readings the only pattern was with quality colour copiers that were capable of generating passable bank notes. When this was announced the practise was supposed to have been going on for upto 2 years. I did some checking at that time, and I could find none in Australia which printed a pattern, but of course our notes are plastic and I guess that feature was disabled in those printers. I do not have access to any now and cannot check.
My understanding was that a payment address is to be stored with the file’s chuck’s ‘metadata’ and not the content. I am unsure if anything is being done in actually watermarking the content. I would suggest that the use of a watermarking program to watermark your content if you wished to do that.
[EDIT: to watermark content would be to change it, which goes against what SAFE stands for, reliability of data. I would hate to see my telemetry data changed because of a watermark]
As @janitor says there are ways to copy books, vids without it being a copy of the actual data.
If one copies your exact file and stores it on the SAFE network then it gets de-dup and nothing is stored and your payment address if effectively copied too (no actual coping is done). The person would have to change the file slightly (ie now technically a different file) to cause it to be actually stored.