MaidSafeCoin (MAID) - Price & Trading topic


#5736

Just seeing this now, but max coins I read is not necessarily guaranteed to be reached, since the safecoin ecosystem will be more dynamic than that. Also, Bitcoin isn’t even a good, or much of any, currency, when comparing the constituents of safecoin’s potential. $20,000 is impossible, but seeing $100 per safecoin is easily in the realm of possibility with the fact that Bitcoin, a literal prototype of safecoin, reached the equivalent market cap, additionally especially considering the time it takes to reach 10% inflation will be years down the road, even not all at once.


#5737

Just thought I would jump in here and throw in my 2c for @warz who IMHO put thought and effort in.

As I understand it (and please correct me if I have this wrong), the initial inflation in the network will be
the result of successful network use (e.g. stored data being demanded). The driver will be the mining success rate times the fraction of coins remaining, and it will be necessary to tune this ‘success rate’ well at launch. But it also has another critical factor… the rate of cost/store (deflation) versus supply will be modulated against available storage. In other words, there is a second factor in net inflation that is directly correlated with useful network adoption.

All current investors are (should be) aware of this dynamic. We are paying the salaries to build the code, but we still need to pay the people who provide the hardware and bandwidth to launch the functional product, and these people are already an indispensable polity. As part of my investment/support strategy, I will have a number of powerful nodes and a high bandwidth connection ready to go on day one, hoping (alongside altruistic motives) to take down my piece of this initial gold rush - by providing low latency, high bandwidth nodes getting the network off to a good start.

There are a few scenarios on how it may play out - and one key is that download demand and space required are somewhat independent variables. Will the network be used to store family photos? Or to run a youtube clone? In some scenarios, there may be some profitable trading after launch :wink:

In the end, in my analysis the initial setting of farming success rate will balance the interests of the ‘angel investors’ (us) versus the hardware providers. The inflation will blunt price appreciation, it is true, but everyone should already be aware that this isn’t a crypto project that can function without a metric crap ton of engagement on the hardware/network provisioning side, and these people need to be paid. I am confident that (almost regardless of the initial setting for farming success rate), that the inflation rate will end up mirroring the adoption of the network, and the value of adoption should outpace the inflation. So if I had to make a prediction, we won’t see a ridiculous price spike a la bitcoin, but if the network is adopted, it will see a relentless grind upwards towards the value of the network use. Even with full (x10) inflation, this is an asymmetric bet at current price with any sort of real world use.


#5738

I disagree because when safecoin is introduced there is 15% existing. So on day 0 it is either 0 increase or infinity increase depending on if you start with zero coins or the 600 odd million coins. 600 odd million coins will exist when safecoin is introduced and everyone knows this so there is no change on day 0.

Then there could be negative number of coins to say 250 million coins increase in the first year. So an increase of negative%age to 38% increase of the number of coins. This is because coins have to be spent before rewards can be given. Then rewards are small until there is plenty of data for people to be requesting some of it.

Have you factored in to your calculations that the total coins existing will decrease significantly for the first few months and then start increase slowly before reaching some sort of steady increase (if steady is feasible)

So in year 1 the increase could be miniscule and is the reason we needed the kickstart of the 10% available for immediate spending and the 5% that is reserved for early investors is locked up till the early investors want to exchange their investment for coins. And that is unlikely since it’d be a loss at first.

BS, that was not anything like an attack. It was not directed at you nor where you thought of in that statement. It was directed at unidentified people who had not done their homework, nor is it an attack. Saying shame on some unidentified or identified person is not attacking. This is the argument of a troll, please do not do it. And that is not a personal attack either, it is asking you not to do that,

Yep and that is how long ago they were talking about it. BTW it was still up in 2016 or 2017 so a couple of years.

The reason I can say some things are wrong is that the algorithm will incorporate some things but its that we don’t yet know to what extend some things will be. My main complaint was about your original reasoning that the majority of the coins would be existing very early, but now that you have changed/moderated that view it is no longer relevant. Yes and a bit was my misreading a later post.

BTW when you say inflation of the coin it suggest a decrease in its intrinsic value and is why some have not liked your posts. The SAFECOIN will not lose any intrinsic value since that is in the network and is used to buy resources. If any value is lost or gained it is in the fiat value.

This is what I meant by the coin being a utility coin. For the SAFE network safecoin’s value is what it can do for “you” in the network and in that its value does not change because of the number of coins. If there is any change then it changes because of the amount of available space on the network. That really is a perceived change.


tl;dr
Due to the need for the network to have data before it can give farming rewards then my opinion is that there will be small growth in the number of safecoins in the first year. There might be plenty of rewards given but that is offset by the number of coins spend and destroyed. Maybe 250 million coins given in rewards and then 200 or 250 or 300 million spent/destroyed. This results in a small change in the number of coins existing.


#5739

Remember its not just coins being created, but also destroyed. For the network to be successful it needs plenty of data to be stored. Not everything stored will be read.

So there will be a period where the balance is negative coin growth as data is being stored before it can be read. How long this lasts will depend on adoption and could be a few weeks or many months.


#5740

This part (even if the numbers are different) is really important. Data has to be uploaded before it can be demanded, and this will be anywhere from powerfully to minorly deflationary at first, depending on the initial storage space commitment. On a successful launch, one of my first moves will be to upload a copy of vital family documents (approx 1Tb), that have some chance of never being read. It will take time for download volume to outpace uploads, and this could be a long time if the network is expanding

Beat me by a few seconds. Tried to encapsulate it with ‘[deflation] another factor in net inflation’, but your formulation is clearer


#5741

Yes, agreed. I will likely be uploading a lot of old personal information, photos, videos of the family, etc etc. But its likely I won’t start till closer to 6 months in to ensure all is good. So that period of decrease in growth may even last 12 months if others think like I do.


#5742

Don’t you think that beta 1, 2,3,4 will build enough confidence so that people would be wanting to upload a lot of data within a week or two of launch day?


#5743

Many won’t know of SAFE till its out of beta and release candidates. Also changes will still be made during those stages so some may not rely on SAFE till its proven itself when it has grown. Remember nothing is perfectly secure/anonymous and like it was 50 years ago, a lot of anonymity was because of all the others. In a city anonymity was easier than when I lived rural where “everyone knew everyone elses business” And like that SAFE with only a few thousand people (users) is easier to unravel anonymity than one that has 100K or more nodes and multiple more users.

My personal opinion is that majority will be uploading stuff that is not critical or too personal in the early days and once they gain more confidence then they will trust SAFE with more critical and personal information. And this too may keep a negative coin growth till it balances out.


#5744

Im only dreaming of a dollar per coin. Ill be happy with that, and am pretty confident we will see it again. Hopefully in the not to distant future.

Quantam physics, double slit experiment, holographic universe.

Its a weird and wonderfull world.


#5745

1 dollar…i would be happy with USD5. But different people have different greed levels…the higher the better of course…:relaxed:


#5746

The Beta network will be separate like Alpha 2,3,4 ?


#5747

Yes, and there is nothing saying there will be or will not be beta Version 1, version 2 etc.

Usually once the beta(s) are considered good enough then there will be the release candidates releases and these should as close as possible to the real thing.

Also there is no reason why the beta versions should take as long as the alphas did since they will only be bug fixes or minor feature additions (usually a UI feature).

Also some projects do not specifically have release candidates and they are simply the later beta versions

The final release candidate could even run for quite a while and simply then be called the release version.


#5748

That’s not how markets work. You have 452 million coins circulating on the market right now. Right now, these “5% investors” could not sell even if their life depended on it. On the day of launch, 215 million more coins come into circulation. That’s an instant 47.5% inflation of coin supply. Just because people know it will happen in advance doesn’t change the fact that supply increases by almost 50%.

That doesn’t make it better, it only makes the launch hype far worse, although drawn out longer. If we have 3-12 months of very limited supply and then all the new coins start rapidly come into the markets it’s going to be a massive pressure on the price.

As the estimation stated 430 million coins will drop on average per year for the first 5 years, let’s assume you are right in that the first year yields minuscule inflation.

The average does not vanish, and still must be 430 million per year. That means the 430 million we’re not getting during year 1 must be distributed across the remaining 4 years. To make the math simple, let’s assume an even distribution. 430 / 4 = 107.5. So each of the remaining years will have inflation of 430 + 107.5 = 537.5 million coins. While 430 million coins are spent, we also have 215 million of supply coming from the 5% investors. In order to accomplish what you call “minuscule inflation” I will set a target of 20% inflation, which is still pretty high, but to give you the benefit of doubt. That’s roughly 90 million coins. 215 - 90 = 125. So 125 million of that spent. We will split those 125 across the next 10 years, which yields 12.5 million per year during 4 years. 537.5 + 12.5 = 550 million

This yields us this 5 year estimate:

Year    Start supply      End supply            Inflation per annum
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1     452,000,000           542,000,000          20%
2     542,000,000         1,092,000,000         101%
3   1,092,000,000         1,642,000,000          50%
4   1,642,000,000         2,192,000,000          33%
5   2,192,000,000         2,742,000,000          20%

Let’s take another example where coins spent is 215 million during year 1 and those 215 does not return back into supply before after 5 years (hence not even included here).
Starting supply: 452 million
New supply: + 215 million (5% investors) - 215 million deflation + 430 million avg inflation

Year    Start supply      End supply            Inflation per annum
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1     452,000,000           882,000,000          95%
2     882,000,000         1,312,000,000          49%
3   1,312,000,000         1,742,000,000          33%
4   1,742,000,000         2,172,000,000          25%
5   2,172,000,000         2,602,000,000          20%

No matter how you twist and bend this, the inflation will be very high in the early stages, you can maybe (and that’s a wild guess) push it ahead by a year, but as you can see you’ll get a big backlash in year 2 with 101% inflation. Even if you could push it further, that just means we will have more inflation in the subsequent years!

Lol, ok, sure bud.

Look at this numbers above? How on earth are you coming to the conclusion that I have “moderated” my original view? It turns out it’s much worse than I originally thought. The word you are looking for is not moderated, it’s exacerbated. You have not just been misreading “a later post”, you’ve been consistently misreading me from the start AND throwing insults while doing so.

BTW when you say inflation of the coin it suggest a decrease in its intrinsic value and is why some have not liked your posts. The SAFECOIN will not lose any intrinsic value since that is in the network and is used to buy resources. If any value is lost or gained it is in the fiat value.

Intrinsic value is meaningless. The only value is that of which we humans treasure. If nobody is using the invention it’s essentially valueless. If we only consider the project as a whole and ignore investors, it makes perfect sense to have high inflation and dilute the holders for “the good of the project”. That however, does not alter the facts of what it entails to do so.

This is what I meant by the coin being a utility coin. For the SAFE network safecoin’s value is what it can do for “you” in the network and in that its value does not change because of the number of coins. If there is any change then it changes because of the amount of available space on the network. That really is a perceived change.

Nor have I argued that. We all know a car is still a car even if it costs $1. In fact, if the usefullness of maid outweights the price it could be underpriced. But if we all could snap a finger and have a car fall down from the sky the value of cars would be low, despite the usefulness remaining high. Supply and demand.

One little note to make: The price of a safecoin, the supply and inflation rates all do impact the usefulness of the coin. A coin with a marketcap of $100 can only store $100 worth of goods and is not going to be able to transact in any deals larger than $100. These things play an important role in the degree of usefulness.


#5749

Its out of date, and will depend on algo used, it may give an idea though. Also it did not take into account the negative growth that is likely to happen early on. So using it as an absolute truth is not a good idea.

For instance we do not know if the desired/expected growth rate in the coins existing will be 200 million a year after the initial period or 400 million per year. And the actual may not match the desired either. It could be well below the expected with more PUTs as people load up the network and people give a lot of storage. That would mean a lot more coins destroyed than expected and the farming rate very much lower than expected. Then again it could be that little spare storage exists and the farming rate ends up real high and lots of coins are created above desired/expected.

Also have you considered what another brought up and that is how much the coin is sought after will affect the price. Demand for the coin could be very high as people want to join the network.

So I cannot agree with your hard and fast holding to that graph which I’ve explained is out of date because of at least one factor it did not consider. And I feel you dismiss too much of what others say. And frankly I think that demand will mean that a 38% increase (max) year one then ?25% increase year two and reducing %age each year will be sustainable considering the need for coin to store data and use the network.


#5750

You know @neo, it’s pretty funny that you start out like this:

I did the reading and used the estimates listed in white paper to present my argument, and now you’re telling me that the estimates are “out of date” and that we don’t know what the inflation rate will be. What reading specifically is it that I need to do to find facts? I just want to know the facts, but it seems you have none.

As you yourself say:

Well, then currently this is our best idea and we have to base the argument around it. Maybe the “algorithm” will change, but you don’t know how. It’s conspicuously convenient how you changed the tone from “check your facts” to “there are no facts” when the calculations were presented. Is it the math showing flaws in your first argument that resulted in this change of heart? Or do you have some information about the algorithm that we don’t have? If so, why don’t you present it? I’m sure everyone here is eager to know.

Also it did not take into account the negative growth that is likely to happen early on.

But so did my calculation. The rest of your post is speculation, I would like to see some numbers. But from what I gather you have zero clue about the emission rate, so there’s not much to discuss. I do think basing estimates on the white paper until new info comes out is the only sensible thing. Even if they are not going to be 100% correct and are just that, estimates.

Also have you considered what another brought up and that is how much the coin is sought after will affect the price. Demand for the coin could be very high as people want to join the network.

Yes. It will certainly affect the price. But these are two contrarian forces. More demand may offset some of the more supply, but less supply would have resulted in a higher price.

And frankly I think that demand will mean that a 38% increase (max) year one then ?25% increase year two and reducing %age each year will be sustainable considering the need for coin to store data and use the network.

Show your calculation please, right now this is just numbers out of thin air. I would like to see you present a 5 year case.


#5751

Selective quoting. The emission graph was out of date not the whole.

Then I can say no more. You have used limited information from one source, where I said do reading of both the paper and the discussions (which include later info).

So I’ll leave you with your analysis, which BTW is not bad and my opinion is just missing some inputs that others have tried to give you.

Well with respect so is yours since the algorithm has not been written and using out of date emission calcs.

I did try and take the latest information posted in the forums about what happens with spare space vs PUT rates vs Farming calcs that has been suggested in an RFC. So I tend to disagree that its pure speculation on my part.

Yea, I gave it above with the 38% (of course it could be lower). The same for me and you exact calculations of actual emissions is speculation. And we both gave our reasons and what we were basing it on.

tl;dr

I don’t think I can add more here. I have model this about 2/3 year ago and the results are very much dependent upon a few factors (spare space, just how fast people PUT data early on, number of farmers and some minor factors). Without knowing these factors for a certainty the exact time for negative growth of coins existing is not known and the growth rate thereafter cannot be know. What is known is that if SAFE is successful then that curve you used has to be significantly modified.

Don’t expect much more from me around this because as you say it is significantly speculative.


#5752

It was the emission table I was referencing to.

Then I can say no more. You have used limited information from one source, where I said do reading of both the paper and the discussions (which include later info).

Discussions != conclusions. If those discussions have led to conclusions that I can use in my estimates I would be happy to include that. Got link? I’m not interested in guesses and wild speculation, only facts and conclusions (and estimates based upon those)

It’s not quite clear how you got to that number. I’d like to see the calculation in whole.

Yea, I gave it above with the 38% (of course it could be lower). The same for me and you exact calculations of actual emissions is speculation. And we both gave our reasons and what we were basing it on.

Sure, but mine is based on estimates from the white paper which arguably is closer to reality, you claim they are out of date, do you have a source for that?

I don’t think I can add more here. I have model this about 2/3 year ago and the results are very much dependent upon a few factors (spare space, just how fast people PUT data early on, number of farmers and some minor factors). Without knowing these factors for a certainty the exact time for negative growth of coins existing is not known and the growth rate thereafter cannot be know. What is known is that if SAFE is successful then that curve you used has to be significantly modified.

Don’t expect much more from me around this because as you say it is significantly speculative.

At least then investors must be warned that there’s a very unclear emission schedule where almost 4 billion coins will be dropped on the market at an unknown time schedule. This is a significant dilution of investors and not knowing when it will happen is a serious risk that cannot be underestimated when making an investment in the project or doing price predictions.


#5753

I think you’ve reached a fair conclusion. Remember also that the 4B isn’t really a cap, as the coins get recycled.


#5754

I appreciate your arguments and your aiming for accuracy. I’m not sure about a a special “warning” being needed, though. It says pretty clearly here that:

There is no set distribution time for the 4.3 billion Safecoin produced during the life of the SAFE Network.

https://safenetwork.tech/faq/#whats-the-use-of-safecoin-in-the-safe-network

Things are just not ready yet and personal feuds are not constructive.


#5755

Exactly as Sascha said. To create a warning about a fact that is clearly stated in plain view would be… I don’t know what.

Should it be like:

Warning: There is no set distribution time for the 4.3 billion Safecoin produced during the life of the SAFE Network.

Instead of:

There is no set distribution time for the 4.3 billion Safecoin produced during the life of the SAFE Network.