Farming Rewards, free space for new users, and processing power rewards

[dallyshalla]

@Anders

If all the new users first need to get safecoins then that seems like an unnecessary hurdle that will stifle user adoption.

I don’t think so;

Of course, what a good plan is; to see at which rate safecoins are farmed;

Based on this you can see the barrier to entry. Does this mean that a mobile device might never have a shot at storing any data since it can’t farm anything. I recall such many occassions that the algorithms calibrate for not massive machines in order to be efficient in terms of expense on the machine against the safecoin gain for supplying resource.

For example:
A 500 gb 1 ghz cpu 1 gigbyte ram computer with 50 mbps going through the band;
vs
10,000 gb .5 ghz cpu .5 gigbyte ram computer with 1000 mbps going through the band;
vs
50 gb 3 ghz cpu 8 gigbyte ram with 100 mpbs through the band.

Obviously at different stages in the network there will be a significant difference in the performance of safecoin earnings.

I imagine in the early stage the last one will win all the time. In the future with much more data storage the second of the three will be somewhat more successful since it can store a significantly much larger amount of data. and the first would simply be an average.

Eventually though it could be obvious that the network can easily handle free storage alongside comprehensive algorithms that would prevent such things as botnets decimating the network with spam data.

For example the legacy “cloud” companies could be installing one of their servers to the SAFE Network as part of fault-tolerance strategies. And this server regardless of the safecoins earnings service a tremendous utility to such an enterprise. Built ontop of the already existing infrastructure. Instead of having a distributed server system of a massive scale personally; such an enterprise firm could so easily integrate some level of engagement in the network and reap the benefits of additional security of data.

[Anders]

@kirkion

The underlying theory of Maidsafe is that there enough people with underutilized hard drive space and internet access, to make the network viable, and provide more value added than syncthing or a similar service.

Do you disagree with this point?

In a bootstrapping phase the users need to be mainly developers and farmers. Later on end users can be plugged into the Matrix… eh, excuse me, I meant plugged into the network.

[dyamanaka]

There are no “secret” meetings going on else where. I was referencing many topics on this forum which touch the subject of this debate. Whenever I get a new idea, I add it to this forum.

[janitor]

@Anders

If all the new users first need to get safecoins then that seems like an unnecessary hurdle that will stifle user adoption.

What kind of argument is that?

How does it work for any currency? Did gold or the US dollar have delayed adoption because one couldn’t get them for free? Or did they get adopted because they represented a stable store of value which wasn’t devalued by marketing promotions or the central planners’ actions?

[Anders]

@janitor

What kind of argument is that?

How does it work for any currency? Did gold or the US dollar have delayed adoption because one couldn’t get them for free? Or did they get adopted because they represented a stable store of value which wasn’t devalued by marketing promotions or the central planners’ actions?

The safecoins are excellent for farming. And for buying large amounts of data storage. For ordinary end users however, having to first get hold of safecoins just to try the system seems like a too big hurdle to me. Ok, maybe in the beginning everyone would have farming on as default, but how to start farming without an account, and how to get an account without having safecoins? A Catch 22 situation?

[janitor]

That idea (or issue, although I don’t think it’s an issue to begin with) was extensively discussed in several topics of this forum.

My argument is if one has $500 for a smartphone or PC and $5 a month to power that hardware, he should be able to spend $0.5 to buy (or rent for a long time) few GB of space on the SafeNet.
If he can’t, he can cut down on his Facebook/pr0n/whatever browsing (to lower his power consumption) or buy a cheaper device and he’ll be all right. It’s not our job to subsidize Intel and Facebook.

[happybeing]

@janitor your logic is sound but not the conclusion, which seems to be: therefore requiring Safecoin poses no barrier.

Even including more fields in a signup process raises the barrier slightly.

Essential principles for success in any market, but particularly online viral adoption, are:

• to minimize barriers and friction to adoption and sharing, while
• maximising the incentives to adopt and share.

This is not an argument for going one way or the other, but for saying it certainly does matter whether we require Safecoin ownership before use. Because even if someone can afford to purchase Safecoin, and even if pre-purchase cost zero, just having to go do it creates friction in the process and will slow or reduce adoption.

[Marin]

@happybeing Even though this is true we should also be at peace that we can’t have Safe network be perfect as soon as we release it. Instead of viewing SAFE not being completely free from the get go we should view it as an advantage.

What I mean by that is that if we keep the barriers to entry somewhat high at the beginning ( no free amount at the beginning + paying with safecoin for additional storage) we would attract users that are genuinely interested in the project and understand the merits of SAFE.

As we have more and more adoption and as we understand all the ins and outs of the network implications we can begin to lower the barriers of entry and start to offer free storage at a rate we know is possible.

I also support the Idea that we should use Safecoin as a key that unlocks access to the network in the launching stages, because that would give Safecoin more value and people would view it as valuable token (which can’t be said for a lot of coins). As @russell pointed out in an earlier thread that would give the SAFE network the aura of exclusivity in the beginning which is definitely a very powerful marketing tool.

P.S. I should add that I understand that having a network that is named SAFE( secure access for anyone) and having it being exclusive in the launching stages is somewhat of an oxymoron but in my view the goal is still the same (SAFE) but the path is somewhat different.

Again I’m in no way proposing exclusivity for SAFE in the long run…

[happybeing]

I don’t have an opinion on whether we should require Safecoin or not, just that it matters, and you make some other good points for us to consider.

I think it’s good to try and identify the options and evaluate them from various perspectives, rather than argue for and against X from the start.

[janitor]

I know that incentives would help, but we’re not talking about (or only about) reasonably secure and private free web disk (you can get that for free from Mega, 50GB, as we discussed previously), so I believe the barriers could not be pricing related.
One other thing I mentioned before is if somebody told you “Here, install this and if you share 4GB with the network you can backup 1GB of your data to the Web for free. The more you give, the more you get”. Sheeeet, if that doesn’t ring a bell, I don’t know what will.

But either way is fine, I had stated my concerns before and I don’t have anything original to say here. We’ll see what the project will decide and whether it’ll work.

[dyamanaka]

Here’s my BSA perspective. It’s more about Safecoin but related to the topic here. These are just my opinions and people are welcome to disagree.

Safecoin Distribution
The SAFE Network will distribute 4.3Billion Safecoins over the next 20 years. Users running Non-Client nodes should be paid in Safecoin for the resources they provide. IMO, there should be absolutely no barrier to run a Non-Client node from the start. We have 20 years to perfect a replacement model after Safecoin distribution is completed.

In order for Safecoin to be distributed, the SAFE Network must have data to farm. If we create too high a barrier to PUT data on the network, it hinders distribution and adoption.

BIG IF, the Network can remain functional with overcapacity, then we don’t need a limitation. @dirvine mentions an archiving feature in addition to de-duplication, so perhaps this is already being handled?

Safecoin Adoption
If the SAFE Network expands with: storage, applications, products, and services… so does the adoption of Safecoin which is used to pay for them. People providing these amenities should be able to get on the SAFE Network with as little effort as possible. What good is a market place with no merchants? What good is a crypto currency with nothing to buy? Once the market place and merchants are established, the customers will arrive.

Have you ever seen an empty parking lot with shoppers waiting for the store to be built?

Client Nodes and End-Users
I consider Client nodes as end-users. We discuss good and bad end-users. Should they get free space? Will they exploit the free space? Will they use the Network to spam? Will they contribute useful content? Is 100,000+ Client users enough to attract new farmers, developers, and merchants? Should we require POUH (Proof of Unique Human)… the list goes on for pages and pages on this forum. I wish I had a perfect answer, but I don’t.

The most likely outcome will be a mix of different end-users. Some will be bad no matter what protocols we have in place. And some will be good, helping safeguard and improve the SAFE community.

We do our best to encourage good behavior and discourage bad behavior. Beyond that, I have no wish to control, limit, or obligate others. The whole reason we are building the SAFE Network is for (Secure Access For Everyone).

[chrisfostertv]

@dyamanaka

Have you ever seen an empty parking lot with shoppers waiting for the store to be built?

I kind of feel like I’m camped out on the SAFElot right now…the anticipation for launch is driving me crazy

[fergish]

@chrisfostertv

I kind of feel like I’m camped out on the SAFElot right now…the anticipation for launch is driving me crazy

Sympathies! But we’re the exceptions. Think of us as analogs to the first iphone users, camping out in line for days, except I like to think we’re actually helping rather than just being groupies.

(PS., Where’d you find the niffty emoticons? I don’t find them in my options.)

[chrisfostertv]

@fergish

Think of us as analogs to the first iphone users, camping out in line for days, except I like to think we’re actually helping rather than just being groupies.

groupies? you mean there are others out here on the lot…they’re probably hiding the ( :letter )

[fergish]

In this whole equation, I think it often gets overlooked what the value of a network user is, free or not.

EVERY new and persistent user adds exponential value to the network, due to “network effect”.

Luckily, it’s going to be pretty easy to ramp up a farming node on almost anything and everything that has an internet connection, and the incentive to earn safecoin for network resources and other value exchange will be easy to approach.

Free surfing is one thing, but as I understand it even sending messages involves PUTs and should cost storage units. Therefore some minimal account storage would be good to allow anyone to start to interface with and use the network.

Whether this can be accomplished first out of the box or will have to come once the network is a bit established (and thus safer), I don’t know, but it seems only prudent to account for the value to everyone and the network as a whole of someone simply participating.

[abittner]

Will users of maidsafe be for example able to use 1/32nd of their own offered free space into to the network as exchange of network storage in return? Because those other estimates about 32surrounding nodes or at least 28nodes agreeing on a transaction and such? I wonder how hard it will be for users without any financial possibilities or will to use funds but rather want to bring in own resources to take part in the network, or for users who dont want to get bogged down in oldschool matters such as classical finances or oldworldly paradigms such as money and all. Any estimates about the rate that own resources can be exchanged for networked resources on the maidsafe mesh? Bringing in 4tb mainstream disk(s) could still offer a user 100gig ballpark wit a factor of 1/32nd networked space. I would even settle for lot less if this time maidsafe was a really stable service and commodity and was there to stay. The factor could be amended over time as more and more people join in and the available avg. space grows etc. With great sorrow I remember old days when wuala started just nicely and soon thereafter fooled over all early adopters, testers, advocates, evangelists and later paying customers and all. Endless unkept promises and blatant lies. Not even mentioning their then-frequent deliberate data-loss, most stupid and nasty bugs and many other woes. Corporate world, business as usual.

[dyamanaka]

@fergish

That way it gives everyone an opportunity to contribute to the network, even if just by using it (which is a major contribution, actually). We’ll, as a community, want to make it fairly easy for someone to upgrade, even if by charity, to a more functional account level.

Reading this old thread again helps me see things more clearly.

[BIGbtc]

@russell Looking to reignite this discussion from some time ago. The Safenet has evolved considerably in 2 years. Have a look at the status quo. Farming rewards, free space and power rewards is an important topic and will be the grease for the big wheels that will soon start turning.