It is time for ERC20 MAID!

In a sense, I don’t think there’s too much discrepancy between this and what Dimitar is saying. Even an initiative such as what is described above requires capital (i.e. money). At the end of the day—as most of us no longer barter but use monetary currency as the medium of exchange—money has become a central mediator in our lives. I think we must distinguish between love and utilization. While “the love (or pursuit for pursuit’s sake) of money is the root of all evil”, the utilization (or employment to create value) of money is the mechanism by which we survive in hopes to thrive.

To achieve both what David illustrates and Dimitar proposes will require a thriving SAFE economy (I.e. strong price performance, healthy Network adoption, convenient SAFE:fiat access/exit ramps, etc.). The question is how we get to that thriving economy. To bring it back to this thread’s topic: I still don’t think ERC20.SAFE is the answer; however, I can see the benefit ERC20.MAID (when paired with broader exchange access) could pose today in setting up a thriving SAFE ecosystem tomorrow.

Also, this might provide some food for thought on the way crypto (which for all practical intents and purposes SAFE is) can help facilitate economic exchange and commerce in countries with weaker economic infrastructure. For any crypto currency to play such a role, it must have a thriving economy as described above:

1 Like

I mostly agree, but the real poor will barter and possibly not have money at all. It’s a deep issue. SAFE will help many more than today, but alone it will not help all. I cannot remember the number of unbanked in the world but it is a lot (well over 1 billion). SAFE or money may not help, there is probably a huge relief effort to get some basic infrastructure in place etc.

The slightly better off that have basic infrastructure and can get folk to take gold/dollars etc. in exchange for food can possibly use a cryptocurrency, possibly. They are arguably more likely to make use of information.

Then the slightly better off again are likely within the reach of data and money.

I think the problems are massive that are being discussed and well funded charities and gov level aid packages are in the billions and still, they starve. It’s not so simple as saying shoot some cash at these people, there is a ton to do and getting past their governments is likely a massive job. WE say btc gets past borders, but the other side of the border needs basic infrastructure. I think we miss that a lot.

So the target minimum infrastructure/resource requirements are real and hard to break down. They do exist though.

3 Likes

It may be an unpopular opinion, but I think charity perpetuates the problem because it does exactly that—simply shoots some cash into the system rather than building the (sociocultural) economic infrastructure that will catalyze self-sustaining growth. Giving people money will (almost) never lift them out of poverty; providing people with a mechanism to make and a vision for how to deploy money can.

I’ll contrast the US and Nigeria as an example. I have an uncle who studied computer science and an aunt who studied microbiology in Nigeria. Neither one was able to use their degrees in any meaningful way b/c Nigeria for (sociocultural) economic reasons lacks the infrastructure to make and deploy money in a constructive way. Had they been in the US, they would have had an easier time plugging into the existing infrastructure to find jobs aligned to their areas of study. Charity or (unstructured and ineffective fiscal policy) just leads to more people with more degrees that they can’t use.

4 Likes

I 100% agree, same with state aid, I recall a person, possibly Nigerian saying stop sending us money, the Gov takes it and buys guns etc. Instead he called for education and access to the world (I read it as data).

9 Likes

Agreed. NGOs dumping grain, destroy markets for local farmers in the name of charity.
They also have eliminated the job of the tailor by dumping clothing from the West on them. I suppose this job would have disappeared anyway but these folk don’t need NGOs accelerating the process.

1 Like

Does it not? Several experiments show that people who actually get cash unconditionally use them to benefit their lives. They know best what they need. They fix their leaking roof. They buy tools to farm. They buy a goat. There is a misconception that poor people can’t take care of themselves and therefore shouldn’t be trusted to handle money.

2 Likes

Corruption in the charity industry is rife and well-documented. That charity as practiced today (and which is often a front for money laundering and tax evasion) doesn’t work is also well documented. This is not to say that we should not help our fellow man. However, it is to say that there are no quick fixes, people are seldom as altruistic as they present themselves to be (I.e. there are often ulterior motives), and simply throwing money at a problem doesn’t fix it. The underlying root causes must be addressed. Better than writing a check or even building a school (so that kids can graduate and have no where to work), help build the economic infrastructure and industry necessary to catalyze self-sustaining development (e.g. build a company, hire the locals, pay them well).

In the US, Nigerians are the most educated foreign nationals. We are here because there aren’t opportunities in Nigeria. Nigeria would be better off if we built business there rather than just sending checks back to our families who could not leave.

5 Likes

30 posts were split to a new topic: Inarticulate/incorrect descriptions of what SAFE is or isn’t

I am curious about the direction we are moving into from here with the ERC20 token. Is there a knowledgable group in charge that is discussing how we will proceed with the offer that was made?

I have seen this conversation drift into all kinds of directions, floating away from the subject.

I think we should embrace the option.

3 Likes

Well…

And…

So, I think moving forward is likely contingent upon:

  • @SwissPrivateBanker’s continued interest
  • MaidSafe hiring someone (or someone technical from the community volunteering) to help set this up
4 Likes

I completely missed out on that after a couple of days and 500+ messages jajaja Sorry for that :blush:

Good luck! I am happy to hear this :+1:t2::+1:t2::+1:t2:

2 Likes

Algae biofuel, Small size particle accelerator, b11 fusion reactor. Just to give you little hopes…

1 Like

Little more utility than day trading is about as far from the future that motivates most developers of DeFi programmable money as you can get. Perhaps Andreas Antonopoulos can help raise your sights slightly higher to the sky on this one, we have trouble imagining where this paradigm shift in money will lead. I believe the Safe Network can form part of that programmable money future depending on the viability of decentralised computation on the Safe Network of course.

Safecoin as planned will be orders of magnitude more private than existing blockchain based privacy tokens. FATF has recently made it very clear that its new rules prohibit privacy tokens of all flavours (i.e. superseding all classification types) and plans to enforce the new rules on all KYC exchanges located in member nations (See references I posted on this thread). Several high profile exchanges have already complied with the new rules and similar to how the crypto KYC rollout has progressed over the last few years the rest of the centralised exchanges will probably drag their feet before shouldering the expense and also falling into line. That means no privacy tokens, travel rule only transactions and applies to Localbitcoin style OTC trading escrow services as well.

This will unfortunately with high degree of certainty exclude native Safecoin from these markets.

The ERC20 DeFi economy was up and running before these new FATF rules were created, but is already partly covered by KYC mostly where large fiat on/offramps are since it is not first and foremost a privacy token marketplace like any future Safecoin exchange will be. It is not that ERC20 decentralised exchanges will be a “secondary” market - it will IMO most probably be Safecoins only available market to indirectly exchange value with the real economy as it shields Safecoin from the FATF “no privacy tokens” and “travel rule compatible transactions only” rules.

These trends and FATF impact are discussed at length in the programmable money DeFi forums that abound in the Ethereum space where developers with similar values to this community are hard at work trying to make a better future as best they can. As the reality of the harsh new FATF rules becomes more apparent I am sure this community will be more receptive to ERC20 -Safecoin bridges and rise to the challenge of providing an onramp into the fledgling Safe Network from outside of the closed system.

6 Likes

look, I am not interested in doing it immediately if there is not a commitment from the company that erc.Maid will be redeemable directly against safecoin, because I think it will put a lot of historic holders of the community at risk when the time has come to switch to safecoins and it means asking my team a lot of work without any guarentee that the end goal is achieved. So on our end we will work on this when makets cool down a bit and I can dedicate some manpower to the project on a voluntaree basis.

But most importantly, the more I think about it, it seems the ideal solution for an ERC20 maid is to join https://renproject.io.
the whole tokenization framework already exists, is permissionless and trustless, and there is a redemption/burn process that will protect erc.maid holders.

I think the community should really look into this. we would just need to build a dApp

12 Likes

I understand and woudl re-iterate I don’t see an issue 1:1 with ercMaid iff the total supply of erc20Maid and OmniMaid were guaranteed to be 452,552,412 and we can ensure the message/burn process or whatever could be as seamless as possible.

This could be interesting as well though. For MaidSafe as long as we stick to the “contract” we had at the crowdsale that every MAID is 1:1 a safecoin then we have done our job. I would say is soem MAID were erc20 then it woudl not matter to us, as long as the 1:1 transfer process can be smooth.

10 Likes

Care to explain why?

Would anyone actually be willing to guarantee it?
If they failed, will they pay for any issues caused?

Yes they do. Just in another way. They use referrals program and focus on the network effect I think Safe network can take a similar path and grow faster with a referral program, where marketers/user can earn safe coin by referrals links. Our is this impossible for the Safe network? Since it`s private?

2 Likes

If there was slippage/error in ETH20, then Omni holders should not be affected. I expect that would be accepted as fair and not contentious.

It perhaps is not about anyone guaranteeing coin count and more a matter that those adopting ETH20, adopt the risk.

The answer to any slippage in ETH20, would be relative to what occurred but if the third party (not Maidsafe) that is actioning that and is limiting the number of coins to what is converted 1:1 from Omni.MAID to ETH20.MAID, then should be simple in principal.

However, at conversion it becomes more complex

If snapshot at conversion:
I don’t know, if there is flexibility in the concept that at conversion all becomes again Omni.MAID for the simplicity of conversion but perhaps a third party can confirm the state of ETH20 blockchain at the same moment as Omni.MAID is snapshot.

But if we burn over time for conversion (and I noted above some reason for doing that):
There is a level of trust at burn over time, if ETH20 slips and is burnt, then those late to burn would have a problem… unless the third party and ETH20 is able to evidence confidence that no issue has arisen.
Perhaps for burn, the only option is a conversion back to Omni.MAID, which third party would see as a diminishing availability of Omni… again a problem for those late to convert back… if there’s been a problem.

It’s Friday and one good IPA :beer: has the better of me; so, I can’t be sure if this complexity of two MAID flavours can be made simple… but I wonder that if there has been no problem with ETH20, then all options are possible… just doubles the work for conversion as previously noted… if there has been a problem, then unclear we would know it.

Still what Keith @krnelson suggested above was very interesting and as motive, it goes beyond what went before; so, there is something worth considering still but it’s not obvious yet.

2 Likes

I get what your saying.

I was not the one asking for guarantee.

It seems unlikely to me any 3rd party would do so, and make right their wrong unless they gained in the first place.
Id like to be wrong, but I dont see it.

If the decentralised contract code checks out is tested and audited to the best of ability, and the Ren project cross chain transaction or similar technology solution is two way so you can bridge back and forth between assets as often as you like, then is there any need for a guarantee? Those risking value in any kind of transaction on a decentralised platform already accept the standard disclaimer: Use at your own risk. This is all the guarantee we are going to get with Maid->SafeCoin conversion after a certain date anyway no matter how the conversion is performed, so none of any of this is risk free.

If conversion Maid->Safecoin is going to be a snapshot then all that is required is an ample “convert back by this date” warning. That would be way more than this community has received from various exchanges delisting Maid or going under over the years with Maid lost forever in the process.

1 Like