5 Likes
Henceforth, you go by the title āZoki the Peacemakerā.
6 Likes
I agree. We have a network that is said to be autonomous and slave. I think that the more autonomous it is, the less slave its and vice versa. Itās not a black/white -thing.
āThe unstoppable autonomous slave.ā 
Gotta go, Iāll get back to this later.
It is 100% autonomous and a servant to us. It is governed by rules of mathematics and rules to ensure the network economics are stable and make the network as economical as possible (no profits or special deals for anyone)
You certainly can have 100% autonomous and a network that works for you.
I also think you are conflating the network economics and what people will do with safecoin outside of SAFE (eg buying/selling goods with SAFEcoin) SAFE has no control with what people do with SAFEcoin and only sets the price for resources and rewards to be given.
Yes, for you and against someone else. Maybe I am wrong and there will be more than one autonomous network competing against each other and for the benefits of different people. Maybe none of them will win.
You know the network will not control your life. It wonāt control anything. It just stores data for you and lets you retrieve data without any control over who does the storing or retrieving
One of the requirements of centralised control is the ability to allow some and disallow others (Control)
SAFE does not have this control.
So NO it is not centralised even in a philosophical sense. It is not centralised in a technical sense
So it is not a centralised system
1 Like
So who controls the issuance of Safecoin?
Well I donāt see control (or power) as that black/white thing. There are degrees of control. One degree is 1/0 allowance / disallowance. Then there are things like persuasion which is not 100% control, but it is still use of power. One of the strongest forms of power is to have others to use their free will to the direction of my benefit. Like: I am willing to let Spotify know what music I listen, because it leads to very good recommendations for what else I could listen. Spotifyās algorithms know my musical preferences and habits better than me. It recently made a list of music I had listened to in 2017, and it was more complete than I could have made myself. It is win-win for me and Spotify, but when we think in terms of larger groups, this kind of service gives Spotify a lot of knowledge and power over masses. Same thing with Tinder. I met my current girlfriend in Tinder and Iām glad that their algorithms enabled our meeting. But Iām bit worried about what kind of power over masses this gives to them.
I think it is like @Zoki said. In technological layer Safenet is decentralized, but as a user perspective it is centralized. Furthermore I think there are many layers / perspectives we can have on Safenet, and from some points of view it is centralized, and from others it is not.
So how does the economy happen here? (This is a serious, not polemical question.) Safenet does not know the price of Safecoin in any other currency, right? It just decides to give X tokens, for Y resources? Then, if people are happy to accept this amount of tokens as a compensation for the resources they provide, the network economy reaches equilibrium and it offers less tokens for the same amount of resources?
Now the Safecoin has to have some value in FIAT in order for people to able to provide the resources for the Safenet. This value is a result of all the purposes the Safecoin is used for, and because of this I canāt see the network economics very separate from other uses of Safecoin.
Also, I think Safenet will take away a lot of the possibilities to restrict the flow of data. Thatās the idea, right? I think based on this it is correct to say that Safenet has the power to end the possibilites to enforce the copyrights of digital goods. I dontāt know if this is good or bad thing, but I think it is use of power.
This could very well be true. Like the blockchain space where Bitcoin was first and remains dominant, close group consensus networks like SAFENetwork will likely blossom similarly.
Ofc, for each fork or redesign/re-implementation, there will be a degree of network effect to overcome (another client, another login, etc). This will be healthy though as it will keep SAFENetwork on its toes and maybe better (!) alternatives/derivatives will even do well too.
2 Likes
Yes, it would be a lot of effort to migrate all the stuff to the competing network. What could be reasons for this? Some economical incentives?
Or maybe the competing network is some kind of extension of Facebook, Google, Whatsapp, Telegramā¦ and it can reach users that Safenet hasnāt had time to reach.
If Safenet is good for āusā, what kind of competing network could be good for āthemā? Who are ātheyā?
I would look to the blockchain world for inspiration. Not much co-opting going on there.
It is also the antithesis of the business model for those sort of companies. They want people to centralised around them, not the reverse. Time will tell though.