MaidSafe Dev Update 14th June 2016 - TEST 4 - Now Complete

It’s not in my nature to pry but gosh darn it I’m so curious how many parts to the presentation there are lol. That’s encouraging news at the least so it’s great to hear. I’ve already seen tweets about data chains, just sayin :wink:

1 Like

Oh hopefully just a short number of them. It will be more testing though and a parallel task to the roll out until we are sure :wink:

2 Likes

Do public ID’s ever expire? What is stopping someone from registering thousands of common public ID names and parking them or never using the accounts after that. Domain registration works since if you don’t pay, you lose the account and domain name.

Really nice user experience with this new test - The vault runs smoothly in the background, barely noticiable in top. Bandwidth usage seems to have been throttled or is it just me ? It seems I can have the vault running and do something else on internet :slight_smile:

http://safeshare.safenet is back online on this test net with some cosmetic changes and cleaned up service names . enjoy !

3 Likes

Possibly to be looked at over time, for now though we take the approach, If I can take it from you then it’s not yours. So unless the network can do this safely (what if you take off backtracking or travelling for a few years etc.) we are probably erring on the safe side for now. In terms of number of ID’s per account there will be a rolling limit of three to begin with.

These are important issues and not to be swept aside though, for now it’s just all out energy to launch first. If the network can clean then we ill be good, but also paying once is a really neat feature of safety in many ways.

So lets say not complete or set in stone, but probably launch with permanent Public IDs. There are things like petnames or use the base58 key (urghh) etc. but we will see.

7 Likes

People will create multiple accounts to bypass the limit… unless it costs Safecoin to create an account?

Agreed, the Network should charge Safecoin per Public ID. Treat it like a “special PUT” request because Public ID’s are considered (unique), therefore costs more than regular data.

EDIT: Great suggestion by @happybeing

At the very least, this increases demand for Safecoin, and helps recycling.

Elephant in the DNS room.
Obviously, the cost/value of Public ID’s (Domain Names) are highly subjective. The Network only sees “data” so pricing can be done arbitrarily (1SC per ID), and then human markets take over, assuming these ID’s are transferable.

If each Safecoin is unique SD data on the SAFE Network, can Public ID’s be treated the same way, using previous and current owners? Just wondering.


@greymatter310 You could visit these threads for more detailed discussions and ideas.

1 Like

The Client Manager can see a Put of any SD type and can charge what it likes. So there is leverage, but magic number care :wink:

Yes, I see what you are thinking :slight_smile: It’s worth exploring, but yes you can sell public Id’s easily.

1 Like

Among the more ridiculous Batman villains, either The Penny Plunderer or The Sewer King, fit the bill better.

  1. Penny Plunderer

This guys steals pennies. Seriously, that’s it. I don’t even know why Batman even bothered, except on slow nights.

  1. Sewer King

Sometimes Batman battles monsters with incredible strength, fighting skill and resilience. Sometimes he fights diabolical geniuses who attempt to kill everyone in Gotham City. And sometimes Batman fights a homeless guy who lives in the sewers with a bunch of orphans he forces to steal shit for him.

2 Likes

A post was merged into an existing topic: POC : Introducing SafeShare, a file sharing and pasting webapp

If we can apply a charge to an ID it should be a multiple of the current PUT cost rather than a quantity of Safecoin - so that the cost remains a deterrent but affordable rather than rocketing if Safecoin rises in value.

I’m not going to debate how much - I’ll leave that hot potato to David & team - but I’m guessing it isn’t practical or they would already have suggested this.

3 Likes

Thanks for the links, I will check them out. But, I also think simple payment for the ID’s might be a good idea. Including a way to sell them. Maybe even a subscription/reoccurring fee? I myself would not care to have a publicID, unless it is tied into messaging some how.

I still think the maidsafe foundation should consider buying up popular names (pre general release), then sell/rent them to generate revenue for reinvesting into the network. If maidsafe foundation doesn’t do it, random profiteers will.

3 Likes

Secure Access For Everyone.

Controlling domains like that goes against that.

2 Likes

Everyone can access other domains. If maidsafe don’t do it, others will - would you prefer that?

1 Like

Isn’t there a function in the DNS that assigns a numbered hash or something to your public ID so you cant just buy up domains? So once Structured Data is implimented on the network and safecoin is in use there could be like 2 unique Blindsites and both would have their own ID or what not. Therefore creating a bunch of domains would be rather useless.

edit: Don’t want to add bloat to the dev update about Pub ID’s as dyamanaka posted the lengthy thread/discussion on this matter already.

1 Like

hence the pet name system that’s been suggested…

2 Likes

Transfer of ownership of anything should be trivial… whether than is PublicID; subdomain; directory; file.

One idea I’ve not thought through is automating a mapping to clearnet urls. Allow webowners to post a unique file to their clearnet/ top level in order they can claim their safenet equivalent - for a small fee. If requested, then network can check clearnet DNS records first and if it gets a consensus of does not exist from the clearnet, then allow user to proceed. Obviously clearnet is with .com/.net/country-code and without that would clash but that’s the bit not thought through…

any how … here to suggest it’s nice to find new sites:
http://quotes.blindsite.safenet/

and also to note that while refreshing the directory http://explore.yvette.safenet/ I had that curious experience of upload being slow and message suggesting failed upload, despite it being successful. Known issue but look forward to trusting the messages and not being alarmed by them in future.

Honestly, this testnet seems like a regression. Slow load times, upload instabilities, small routing table, tons of warning messages, connection failures, etc.

I’d like to point out that this would seem to be the case when only bad experiences, hick ups and bugs are reported, while all the use cases that worked without any hitches were of course not reported or posted on the forum. I’ve noticed there are more bugs reported on here and github compared to the last couple of tests, but I’ve also noticed quite a few more forum-comers as well, so both are positively correlated.

1 Like

Perhaps I am lucky but its been a roaring success since the restart I have had zero issues except early on losing access to my account but I feel like I may have forgotten the password.

5 Likes