Bare in mind, the cost of upload for those people will be much higher on SafeNetwork than today.
Do we have a plan how to incentivise those, or is it planned to be a charity?
I’m not sure I entirely follow. Everything has a cost, including piratebay which rely on donations. On SAFE that cost is just paid up front. There are so many benefits to having no intermediaries or censorship that I don’t see the one time cost for permanent storage being much of an issue or considered charity for others to use it. If they felt like that was charity they could upload it as private data. Maybe I’m misinterpreting what you are saying though.
There is a strong need in people to “own” and “collect” things. Spotify is not the same as my mp3 collection, Netflix is not the same as the big suitcase of dvds many people have at home. Dropbox deletes your files when you stop paying. Service terms can change, companies can go bancrupt.
Safenetwork will allow people to create something that will last. My collection of stupid movies can be totally insignificant to the world, but the feeling that I am creating some kind of legacy, that is what will people pay for. Or at least one of the reasons.
8 Likes
This is vital and if we can simplify as much as recent couple of weeks (parsec going == 15,000 lines gone, last week 16,000 lines gone) then SAFE is not only OSS it is easy to understand and adapt/extend and more importantly keep working on. So say maidsafe was killed politically or some nefarious method. Unlike google killing a project SAFE exists and is able to still run. There is not corporate “shut down” mode and we work hard to make sure there is not. The most important thing after open source, is understandable open source. This is our goal right now, launch with all features and tweak as we go, but not launch a pile of spaghetti, but launch clean clear code.
23 Likes
Consider the value of lots of people being able to access something, rather than the cost of it. If many people get value from something, the network has delivered on its promise.
It isn’t about the uploaded bearing the cost, then trying to retrieve it from users. It is about the uploader giving the network something that users want to consume.
2 Likes
I am seeing the value in SAFE! Once there is data and apps, everything follows…
We are going to subsidize app developers… why? Cause we want them to spend their time now with the incentive that if their app is used enough in the future, we give them a share of newly mined coins.
Why not do the same with uploaders… We want them to spend their safecoin now and upload. We want not only to spend the safecoin, but also to upload useful data and publically! Why not give them nanosafecoin for every downloaded MB of their uploads?
It fits the narrative perfectly… I don’t see the reason why not to do that…
Just a thought… Now I am seeing this is getting off-topic - is there any other more closely related thread? Something like incentivization of uploaders “PtU”?
This is hilarious! 
Ou, I see now… another attack vector?
Once I know I uploaded that, I could flood the network by downloads of “my” file and this could make my attack more sustainable…
But isn’t it the same with apps? Could I create a shitty, resource-demanding app and flood the network by using this particular app sucking resources and PtP rewards at the same time?
So you do know about PtP…
Yes, but maybe I do understand it in a wrong way…
Btw., since now I hope some admin will get this off-topic into another thread since I really dont wanna derail this one…
Okay, you are laughing… I can bear it.
I very well understand I have to pay for uploading something to the SAFE Network… no doubt about it.
Then, this data can be useful for only me or maybe possibly for millions of other people.
Are you laughing at my suggestion that maybe, if somebody pays with his money to upload the whole mirror of Wikipedia (lets say its 100GB), he does not deserve something back when people use “his” mirror in the future years? Is that what was so clearly stupid?
Or the mechanism is already in place, I dont know it and that was hilarious? 
No, just thought it was funny to see a second evolution/genesis of the PtP concept. No worries bud.
1 Like
No I think most would agree with you and this is pretty much the concept of Pay the Producer (PtP).
1 Like
This pops up a lot in the past 2 years. I’ve witnessed some horrendous token swaps and then the projects went nowhere (mainly due to a lot of people calling them scams due to the swap). I really hope Safe is launched by the time this bull run is in full swing but wasting developer time on ERC20 (when it might change to some other non-etherium standard) as well as answering millions of queries of lost tokens/missed deadline etc meanwhile getting really bad publicity sounds like a huge waste of time.
1 Like
Why would he deserve payment for data he didn’t create?
Edit: To reiterate, detaching the view of who uploaded what public data is actually a good thing. The network does not care what data it serves. It just needs to serve what people wish to consume and serve it well. If something is successful and lots of people consume it, the network has done a good service to society.
How is it paid for? By people paying to upload new data that is either useful to them or others.
I get that people wish to conflate data creation/ownership with data upload, but it just isn’t possible. They are separate things and should be considered separately too.
1 Like
We’re off topic. Let’s save the discussion for another place/time.
1 Like
Why would he deserve payment for data he surely didn’t create but paid for a very expensive transport to places where needed? Because transporting free stuff to the network is usefull but expensive. If we don’t incentivise this behavior, this behavior will occur less…
Data upload won’t be expensive. It would be something the Wikipedia foundation would easily cover if it felt it was worthwhile.
Rent seeking is not something which should be encouraged. If public data is genuinely valuable, funding the small cost to upload it should be easy enough. It wouldn’t take a rich person to upload many terabytes of data. Everyone can take part in liberating data.
4 Likes
Can you guess how much today’s dollars will take to upload 100GB to the SAFE Network in 2021?
As far as I see it, it surely won’t be less than $100, probably more, lets say something like $500.
If am right, it’s still a great price for uploading the whole history of family photos for eternity. Great deal! I am definitelly going to do that. But how is it usefull for society?..
…What we need is people transferring everything currently free out to the safety of SAFE placing it public to remain free for everyone for ages. In my world, this behavior (of spending money for transfering free stuff where needed) is incentivised and is happening out of sheer greed for a good of everyone.
Edit.: Okay, okay… maybe I am over pessimistic and it will be $40 at minimum, but it does it change my point?
I suspect it will be a lot less than that. I even have 100gb of storage on my mobile phone. A terabyte is only a handful of dollars. Storage is cheap and unpopular data doesn’t use up much bandwidth either.
The entire English text of Wikipedia is only about 20gb too. Wikipedia:Size of Wikipedia - Wikipedia
For your private data, you will pay what you think it is worth, or not. For public data, it is your gift to the world, or not.
I wouldn’t underestimate what people will share, even if at some cost to themselves. Wikipedia survives on such donations, in fact.
3 Likes