To explore this idea, just a little bit more.
With Tether for example they would need 8300 MAID to have their 83B+ marketcap in SAFEDBCs, but removing their decimals they would just need 83 MAID.
If you would make a purchase with these Tethers you wouldn’t have the exact amount in cents, but who argues about cents nowadays? Cents can be interpreted as a small tip, like 50 cents is going to make you get rich or die trying
With a bitcoin if you want your full satoshi worth you would need 0.1 MAID, to create a bitcoin.
In a sense this would also be a feedback loop, for how many tokens are created and would directly feed into the fees. The SAFE supply would decrease, while the tokens supply would increase, a fun scale.
The reason why there are over 10K tokens on Ethereum, is because it’s cheap to create tokens, which only spams the environment with tokens that might never be useful. In this scheme, those tokens could be changed back and after a failed experiment still contribute to the SAFE universe instead of taking up useful space.
The pushback might be that this doesn’t scale, but that’s the purpose of subunits. One might argue, that projects would just wait untill they have subunits, but the computational value of those would be less than the first wave of dirvines that get onboarded. It almost becomes a numbers game, to get your hands on the first wave tokens, when the subunits are available.
Projects that don’t got SAFE, can still do a crowdsale in SAFE or ask for a crowdfunding if their SNapp is useful.
Is it worth it to pay 40K dirvine in txfees to send a 1 Tether, that’s valued at 1 dirvine? I really don’t know, but I it’s guess food for Todd. Maybe Todd can really have that food when he farms those 40K dirvine.
Currency use to be backed by gold, now it’s back by thrust, trust into the abyss.