Most exchanges require it
1 Like
Centralized exchanges, but yes, however IMHO that’s a separate issue not applicable to the purchase of SAFEcoin proper.
2 Likes
@Antifragile
My point is that from my understanding there’s nothing intrinsic to SAFEcoin the utility token that would require KYC any more than tokens on cam sites.
2 Likes
Yes safecoin and MAID are utility tokens and as the USA guys say if its for purchasing resources or functionality on a network then its a utility token and not under their securities control. Just like game tokens for use in the games.
But the requirements are not based on securities but the requirements for the company providing the services to operate due to the products they may also be handling. EG exchanges trading even one securities coin has to have KYC or if they do banking functions they have to do KYC
@Antifragile
I disagree. If you’ll continue to assert it as fact, please begin citing relevant passages in law.
@Antifragile
I’m not talking about exchanges. I’ve already conceded that but it’s a derivative issue and not my point.
I don’t believe it’s wise to constrain design discussion by that which people claim but are unwilling to provide evidence for and your attitude is not constructive.
I don’t think this needs to be so complicated, and could be (relatively easily) solved with a handful of on ramps such as:
- SAFE integration into centralized exchanges coordinated with launch (e.g. user goes to Coinbase and buys SAFE with crypto or fiat —> user leverages SAFE to upload data, for payments, etc.)
- SAFE integration with decentralized exchanges coordinated with launch (e.g. user goes to Bancor and buys SAFE with crypto —> user leverages SAFE to upload data, for payments, etc.)
- SAFE Network based exchange (e.g. user downloads SAFE browser/app and is presented with routes to multiple routes to purchase SAFE, including those mentioned above + a SAFE hosted/facilitated marketplace that could either be connected to other exchanges on the backend to fill orders or that provide farmers/SAFE holders the opportunity to sell supply for either fiat or other crypto)
When the Network launches there will naturally be ~452M SAFE in existence, much of which will find itself on the open market as people spend to upload data or sell to take profit. Those two actions will provide access to SAFE through any of the channels listed above. Were it to be the case that people hoard SAFE at the beginning, the relative value would increase, incentivizing farmers to join the Network. Those farmers would eventually want to take profit by selling their coins through a channel mentioned above.
5 Likes
Quick running summary of getting funds into/out of the Safe ecosystem:
Does not Require KYC
Redeeming existing MAID
Person to Person
Farming
Trading for goods/services
Developer Rewards
May Require KYC
Decentralised Exchanges
Over the counter
Requires KYC
Traditional Exchanges
Credit/Debit card
9 Likes
@Antifragile
That’s only partially correct. The title of the topic is “How should SAFEcoin be available for purchase?” not “How should SAFEcoin be available for purchase via exchanges?”. Moreover, it only applies to centralized exchanges. That’s a very small subset of the possibilities and therefore KYC should not dominate this topic, especially with no evidence to support your claims being provided.
Prepaid cards is one idea among others. I think it would be good for us to take a step back and brainstorm options that don’t include the obvious ones such as exchanges. SAFE network is innovative and we can surely innovate in this way as well.
3 Likes
What I meant by that was, if you wanted run a small business, such as an online shop, on the safe network, selling jewelry, or graphic design, you could do that with safecoin.
Or perhaps you have a popular podcast served via Safe, then you could bring in sponsors or advertising via fiat currency, thus moving vaklue in/out of the Safe ecosystem.
2 Likes
Finding new ways other than exchanges is fine, however a lot of what I am seeing is over the counter or barter for them and thats a no go, I mean lets get real we at least need exchanges and defi and move forward from there, not dev rewards cmon man, come on.
1 Like
Nowhere have I argued that exchanges shouldn’t be an option. They should be. My argument regarding exchanges and KYC is that it should not dominate this topic. That’s laziness.
That’s not a compelling argument and I’m unsure of your purpose with it.
Then what is your compelling case? What are the options moving forward that are not some over the counter nonsense? Don’t finger wag at me you have done enough of that with no content already. People are simply stating obvious solutions.
Most businesses the world over operate this way with cash.
Nothing to stop someone operating a burger stall, and accepting Safecoin.
1 Like
You’ll be pleased to know that Safecoin does not have any of these restrictions 
2 Likes
For what? Vague questions are useless noise.
I did and I will. Your reply was low-effort and unconstructive.
That’s your incorrect opinion and it carries no weight with me. You should set your obvious personal issues aside and focus on discussion that adds value to SAFE.
@Antifragile the more I think about it, I don’t think we have a real problem here. This is how things are likely to happen in my opinion:
We are reaching the beta. We start screaming everywhere “See us! We exists!”. The first people to listen to such things are the speculators. The forum will fill up with them quickly.
They will ask where the ERC20 token is. They are told we don’t have one. 10 speculators start making ERC20 MAID. They are trying to advertise it in the forum. They are told that it is not good and we want direct integration.
They say “thank you” and head to their sites and channels, where there are millions of ethereum users to give them ERC20 MAID…
As you can see there is no problem. There is no point in discussing this topic anymore, time will tell.
And to note, I, @Antifragile and anyone else who wants an ERC20 token are not bad people. Just like you we have different knowledge, but just like you we want the best for Safe.
It’s just that our knowledge shows a different path as the best. Personally, I will no longer participate in discussions on this topic, because I do not see a threat to the future of Safe anymore.
4 Likes
There will be no centralised exchange listing Safecoin. We can rule that out with extremely high probability, FATF has spoken and centralised exchanges are toeing the line:
There might be a small window of time where tiny under the radar intermediary localbitcoin type exchange brokering transfers is possible but unfortunately escrow service providers are just over-the-counter trading brokers i.e another form of centralised exchange service and fall under the same worldwide FATF rules - No Privacy Tokens allowed - so any key individuals involved will be leaned on to comply and/or shut down if compliance is not possible as will be the case with Safecoin, probably sooner rather than later.
So unless MaidSafe plans to make Safecoin traceable and non-anonymous there will be no long term solution other than to fully embrace decentralisation in all it’s forms including gateways to liquidity sources, regardless of your moral or practical stance on the KYC/AML regime that FATF built.
I am not too worried I fully expect the Safe API will be used to create various two way bridges between various brands of ERC20-SafeCoin and Safecoin transparently locking tokens between them as already happens with ERC20-Bitcoin and similar. I just hope the first iterations will not be too frail and centralised since there will be no smart contract facilities available initially on the Safe Network to properly decentralise the Safecoin half of the process.
The great thing about decentralised permissionless networks: If there is a need, anyone motivated enough can fill it without requiring permission. Contracts can be verified independently giving credibility to the process freeing the need for decree of authenticity by Maidsafe or anyone else (at least that will be the case when computation is available on the Safe network).
3 Likes
It does not mean no centralised exchange.
Bittrex intl is in Lichtenstein, and is not a participating country.