After seeing the example of the community run network and then seeing S3 going down, is there going to be just 1 MaidSafe network or potentially multiple? Would there be any advantages to have say 3 MaidSafe networks with independent vaults?
I guess a lot of companies and/or organisations want to run their own version of SAFE. but for the most part I hope it’s going to be the real thing, as the same farmed Safecoin couldn’t work on 3 different networks.
Perhaps one of the main reasons for a singular global network (apart from special ones companies/etc run) is the SAFEcoin component. If you start a second network then it needs to be widely used for its coin to be worth anything.
I am sure there will be certain situations that will see another network based on SAFE code to exist as @polpolrene said. And it is most likely to be the very large companies/governments who have a large number of computers throughout the organisation and are not interested in the coinage. I am sure there will be smaller ones too.
But as far as a global public one is concerned then the most popular one is likely to be only one people interact with. To access files held on 2 different SAFE based networks would require setting up for the 2 networks, how many people are going to do that? Not many is my guess.
If people want to farm coins then they will farm on the network that has the accepted coin.
It’s an interesting question and one that sprung immediately to my mind when I first heard about the SAFE Network. Because SAFE is open source and forkable, it’s inevitable that different variants will emerge. It will be in the best interest of SAFE and its children that they co-operate around a core set of features (like Linux), because not to do so is to journey up a blind alley. If SAFE is to offer an alternative to the bad old Internet, it must at least replicate its best feature - its universality - but the internal market will be a complicating factor in this and I’m not sure how it will work out.
Every AI will want its own- billions at least. Sorry, not much above spam here, but do wish to raise the question- what if the number is huge? What is the practical useful limit?
I’d say a small number and very small if you want to have a viable marketable coin.
It is possible that it could go belly up and no network has a coin of value and hundreds/thousands of networks spring up
Companies/governments will have their own, but I really ignore these as the public will not be interacting with them
Sorry that doesn’t make any sense. AI would hijack any network it wants to and use a totally different system tailored to its purposes. So NO there will not be billions because of AI
There’s an important difference between the Amazon situation and SAFEnetwork… that SAFE is designed not to be able to fail like this. That doesn’t mean it’s impossible, but near enough to mean that there should be no reason to have multiple networks for this reason. There may be for other reasons though as others have stated, but possibly only one global public SN.
At least that’s one of the key sins behind it!
I think the thing to remember is that unless there are some differences in the resource demands of the networks, then storage is storage and the price per gigabyte will rapidly approach parity. If the value of the alt safe coins and the original safe coins are essentially both locked to the value of data storage, which is essentially a commodity then the coins can easily be traded for each other using a multi-currency wallet.
I also think that it could be quite valuable to have alternative networks for archiving on the low end and high performance (gaming) on the other.