Are you thinking something like BitShares Delegated Proof-of-Stake Consensus?
I don’t know why you’re asking that. Proof-of-Stake is in no way a statement of proof of commitment to the principals that SAFE is built on. The last choice should be some way that an interested party can buy votes, as if money is most important - that would be inviting corruption. You only need to look at the state of politics and economics, to see that too much money makes a mess. That DPoS is BitShares’ weakness - the voting doesn’t work and I wish they’d just do away with it.
SAFE simply needs defence against those who are too stupid to appreciate it. The more natural route to that would be to make it work well and capable of defending itself but that is to suggest building something that works. The suggestion that we walk up a mountain and come back with genetics set in stone, is either folly or disingenuous. The best defence is a system that just works; in the case that it doesn’t work, then we build another one that does… despite that being a frustration to those who like to exploit others’ privacy; security; and freedom.
What I am suggesting is clear enough above… some natural continuity from what established the original; something that has an informed opinion and can confirm what is progress and what is not, is likely better and less of a risk, than ever letting the system be vunerable open to corruption.
for anyone reading this thread and wanting a short, simple, 1-sentence answer for the problem discussed here, here’s my best shot:
"SAFE network will be forked many times as time goes on, and all of these forks will be competing to be the best overall, so when one fails another will take over, but multiple will always exist.
Notes:
- I’m also sure that the different networks’ Safecoins will be called different things, and while they won’t be able to be traded across-networks, they will still have different values and you’ll porobably have accounts on the different networks if you want to have each different type of Safecoin, and want to be able to trade / hold them.
- I know David Irvine and MaidSafe will continue to exist as one of these competitors for the best instance of SAFE network, so that’s awesome
- Also, as stated earlier, SAFE HAS NONE OF THE INHERENT PROBLEMS THAT BTC HAS, like transaction fees, block sizes, etc etc, so stop worrying that it will “tear itself from the inside” like BTC is currently doing. Because this network doesn’t have any of those weaknesses
1 Like
And what happens to the data on the failed one?
Ctrl+C
Ctrl+V
…right?
Also the data will still exist. All it means to “fail” is to fall from the #1 spot. So that network will still be around, just like litecoin is still around. It’s just not #1
Also you must consider the weightier issue of momentum.
The original SAFE network will be running for a fair time time before any forks are done simply because the time required to fork off another network and make it “better” will take time. SAFE will have such a number of vaults, clients that forks will seem like a loney ant compared with the nest of army ants well established.
So the large number of people using SAFE who simply cannot be bothered chasing a “new SAFE” that may fail will provide such a base that competing networks will have to be specialised to help entice a certain segment of society to use it.
In other words if any forks make it to mainstream/live then they will most likely be very specialised forks and rather than compete they will complement the wider storage systems. Also it is very likely these competing networks will have a “bridge” that allows use of the SAFE network in conjunction with the fork.
That makes sense. Thank you for simplifying the issue.
The mental conflict I have going on in my mind is fascinating. One part of me totally gets the natural evolution of ideas/development and has optimism towards humanity that once they experience what true communication freedom (90’s internet) is they will be much more resistant to forks (current corporate internet fork) that take it all away. Where the other part of me still feels angry and cynical from watching the internet slowly go from “freedom for the people” to “high tech. corporations making our lives easier” in exchange for our individuality and/or thoughts.
Ultimately, I will move on from this thought exercise, because I tend to only worry about things I can/could control. I find comfort by remembering why I think SAFE Network will succeed where others have failed because of the novel combination of resources and autonomous monetary reward system that makes freedom and privacy sustainable by allowing the individual to regain control over personal data.
2 Likes
SAFE network will be forked many times as time goes on, and all of these
forks will be competing to be the best overall, so when one fails
another will take over, but multiple will always exist.
So just like Bitcoin and altcoins. Not ideal, but in the world of decentralization and protocols, there’s no way around it.
1 Like
Yes, it’s great the world has David Irvine and the SAFE team to develop and improve upon the SAFE network. But just as it is for everyone in this world, bad things happen. Heaven forbid something happens to him and team to prevent them from doing future changes. If it does, who will make any of these future changes?
Agreed, SAFE will not have these problems and is one of many reasons why I think SAFE will be successful. But it will certainly have unforeseen issues down the road. It would be naive to believe SAFE will not have it’s own set of issues to ensure it remains future proof. We need new versions of Windows, iOS, Android, etc. The landscape changes so software needs to change with it.
SAFE could be a problem of its own success like bitcoin. If bitcoin was an obscure altcoin, forking it and making a better coin would be easy because it isn’t widely used. But bitcoin has achieved the network effect and is currently the king of digital crypto-currencies. New investments and ideas are being hatched every day based on the assumption bitcoin will survive. I.e. the bitcoin economy is big and will get bigger and bigger. So it’s not easy to fork bitcoin and expect the bitcoin economy to choose which fork to use. It undermines confidence. Imagine the US government announcing it will replace the USD with a new currency every few years and the previous versions would be rendered illegal and/or worthless. It would create financial havoc.