Let’s say a resource is heavily requested. In BitTorrent and other Kademlia implementations, a computer downloading a resource also seeds it, so there is a balance between publishers and consumers.
In the SAFE network, the vaults can’t choose which section to belong to, and moreover each vault may only have a chunk of the file.
How exactly does the mechanism work to adjust for load balance for a particular resource? Does it get more redundantly stored across more sections in response to more requests, and if so, how? And how does it cache resources closer to the requester?
Also, what are the proposed economics of this? I have read (from this quora answer: https://www.quora.com/How-does-IPFS-compare-with-the-SAFE-Network/answer/Dan-K-76?share=55f104a7&srid=3gu) that publishers are actually going to get paid the more their resource is accessed? I have a few economic observations:
Accessing your own resource shoud be costly or a zero-sum game at best, otherwise people would game this similar to clicking on ads hosted by their own website, to earn money.
If access is absolutely free, then people can game this by launching denial-of-service attacks on particular resources.
It seems to me that the responsibility to provide a resource should accrue equal to the amount of resource consumed. Providing a resource could be done either personally, or via paying safecoin. If you don’t have enough safecoin to provide a resource, you shouldn’t be able to access it either.
There can be a “free tier” for known members with a reputation (ie no sybil attacks). For example a certain amount of resource access per day. But you can’t just have unlimited amounts. I suppose if you have no limits then each section can adjust its resource availability based on the proportion of the requested resource.