Network Storage Limit VS Network Reserve


Hey everyone.
This solution is not official. I just want to get a survey of what you think?

NSL (Network Storage Limit) = Average amount of data stored by members.
NR (Network Reserve) = Users buy storage directly from the Network, using their safecoins. This amount increases their storage limit beyond the NSL amount.

Free Account = Instantly login to try the Network. Free storage = (NSL x 0.001)
There are 2 ways to increase your free amount to 100% NSL.

  1. Pay safecoin/X to speed up to 100% NSL.
  2. Gain farmer rank to get up to 100% NSL.

Before you comment, here is some Q&A.

Q: How much storage is the NSL?
A: If we have 10,000TB currently being stored and 1,000 users. The NSL is the average, which is 10TB.

Q: What happens if a user tries to exceed their NSL.
A: They will be prompted by the Network to purchase more storage space. They can also clean up their own storage to stay under the limit.

Q: Why do I have to pay safecoin to get 100% of NSL amount?
A1: We are considering different solutions in order to avoid this barrier. For now, this is the easiest, least complicated way of dealing with users/bots who make multiple accounts in order to take advantage of the NSL. The Network burns the safecoin, which makes it expensive to create multiple accounts. But it does not stop someone from doing it if they must create another login account for whatever reason. Also, you can just farm for safecoins. Or another user can “gift” you safecoins.
A2: We added another way to gain the NSL amount, using farmer rank. By being connected and providing resources, you gain ranks even if you aren’t able to farm safecoins due to low farm rate or coin cap.

Q: Can a farmer just sell their storage to another user?
A: Unfortunately, no. The POR token system is required to do this, which slows the network considerably. Storage sales can only be done between the Network and the buying user.

Q: How does the Network price storage when selling to users?
A: As the NR amount approaches zero, the safecoin cost will rise accordingly. As the NR amount increases, the safecoin cost will reduce, making it cheaper for others to buy storage if there is an excess available.

Q: What does the Network do with the safecoins it earns from selling storage?
A: It burns the safecoin, reducing the total circulation amount, thereby allowing farmers to re-farm it.

Q: Does this mean safecoin is equated to storage?
A: No. The safecoin cost to buy storage will adjust based on NR availability. So there is no 1:1 relationship. Also, this has an interesting benefit. People cannot buy cheap storage to hoard then resell it at more expensive prices. The most they can do is buy storage for themselves. This is like everyone being able to buy storage directly from the manufacturer. There is no reseller markup.

Q: If safecoin becomes very expensive in “national currency” terms, why would anyone buy storage?
A: They wouldn’t. More likely, they would become a farmer and earn safecoins. This has 2 benefits. As more farmers add storage to the Network, the NR amount increases. Then users can buy cheaper storage if they need it. The Network doesn’t really need safecoin to sustain itself, it just needs resources. But safecoin helps balance between supply and demand.

If you have a more efficient solution. You are more than welcome to post it here.

Edit: Redefined NSL to be the average data stored, not the average storage available.
Edit2: Added “Free Account”.

Exchange price vs. resource price
Path of Least Resistance
Safecoin resource (consumption) model

That sounds like the best plan I have heard so far.
I would say that the ratio should be adjustable, based on the consensus opinion of the community. I don’t expect we could pick a number now and have it be anywhere near correct.
Farmers might have the most skin in the game to ensure the ratio is most effective. They might end up pushing for a larger NR though. In the long term, that may not be a terrible thing.

Maybe a scheme like:
Every time a farmer successfully creates a new coin, they are allowed to cast one vote to keep the ratio the same, or adjust it up/down. After a set time frame (or a set number of votes), the votes are tallied and the ratio is adjusted accordingly.

I expect the total network size will always be increasing, so you could set limits such that the nominal NSL total should never be decreased due to a vote, or within certain limits, etc.

I will be interested to see how the safecoin price for NR will be calculated, how deduplication will affect the counts, how the totals will be tallied network-wide, what the timeframes will look like, etc.



I was thinking an adjustable ratio as well but didn’t know how to implement it.
Thanks for your suggestion :smiley:


The more I look this over the more I see. Couple things I see, though.

Would the NSL/NR ratio be fixed or could it be altered? I don’t think we have enough data to determine the optimal ratio, and what’s optimal may change as adoption and usage dynamics change.

If a poor someone couldn’t afford a safecoin and so needed to join the network and mine rather than pay a safecoin, would they not need to contribute the NSL amount of storage to the network? If the NSL were very large, that would also pose a significant barrier to entry. It is probable that even getting a computer and a terrabyte hard drive would be a considerable barrier for some.

What if anyone could open an account and get a minimal, say 50mb, storage to work with for free? Use a captcha system of some sort to make it as machine-resistant as possible. Then, with an interface to the network, one could obtain safecoin by purchase or charity (or from another owned account) and thus upgrade to the NSL/NR scheme you’ve laid out. This would allow anyone to access and do some very basic but very empowering things, But it would limit the damage someone could do by making multiple accounts.


What if the network gave them a safecoin if they complete a captcha ? As for the NSL, we can make that the network average stored data. If they farm they get a lot of safecoin to be able to go above NSL?


Sorry David,
I was thinking average storage “available” from the NSL pool… as opposed to actual data “stored”. Your way is more accurate to measure the average usage. And yes, they could farm safecoin to go over their NSL. Or they could buy safecoin from other farmers and do it that way.

This means 100% available storage goes to the NR pool right?


No worries, this can be played around with a little, It seems to be the least of the issues we need to work out. I think your plan seems to be very hopeful as a solid way forward.


The problem with that would be that someone could create tons of accounts without need or contribution, and fill them with junk to clog the system. Not as bad as bots, but it could be bad enough. Then if a bot cracked a captcha it could do serious damage.

I think it better to keep the incentive for creating accounts to a minimum. The minimum storage could be more, say 1-2gb, or whatever makes sense,.


Could be an idea. Increase at 50% per day ? or similar. So for bots it is to slow and they need to break a captcha to register.


Are you saying,

  1. User joins the network, as a “Free” account and gets 1GB free, no strings except for the captcha.
  2. Then user can farm/purchase/receive safecoin, to upgrade to “Member” status which grants the NSL amount.

I like this method. Impatient people are able to jump in, play around, view some websites, email their friends with no commitment. And then if they really like the network, they can upgrade to Member status which enables much larger storage space as well as a way for other apps to determine potential bots accounts.


Yes I think this works for all edge cases. I am still pondering, but this seems to be pretty solid I think,

What about the increasing free space on a calculable basis, that may also help with adoption etc. I am still thinking of the calculation (I dislike time, but may be defeated in this case).


Do you mean instead of paying 1 safecoin to upgrade, it just upgrades itself as time passes?


Yes, slowly, safecoin (payment) accelerates it?


Hmm… yes that could work.
People who have no friends, no resources, and no money, still have time.
So yeah, pay 1 safecoin or waiting period.

I still think that determine bots will just make multiple accounts on day 1 and wait out the time period.


Yeah, that’s pretty much my idea.

We want minimal barrier to access and effectively use the network, but we HAVE TO HAVE resources continually provided in order to maintain and expand. If we give away too much we erode the network and expose it to attack and waste. With a reasonable Captcha barrier we can almost eliminate malicious damage by excess accounts, only if we don’t give away too much.

I have my reservations about tying the value of safecoin to network storage, but it’s also a place to start as far as value goes. If the value of safecoin exceeds what the network will return in terms of storage, etc., then it will decouple. But anyone can still access the system.


YEs if we get it right this will happen fast. We can still use safecoin but only as we would any currency. The advantage is the anonymity etc. of safecoin.


I too share that concern. Imagine if safecoin was $1000 like bitcoin was not too long ago. That would be an insane cost to just get NSL.

I was actually thinking a Farmer Rank instead of Safecoin payment. So let’s say you are contributing resources, no matter how small. The idea is you’re “trying” to support the network. By being online and giving up storage space, your ranks goes up and grants you more % of the NSL. So even if you never made a single safecoin due to the coin cap and low farm rate, you still gain the NSL by proving you support the network.

I definitely like the “Free” account entry. Mass adoption should really take off, using that method. While a set 1GB amount will not scale, maybe we can make it 0.001% of the NSL amount? So if the NSL is 1000GB, then the free amount should be 1GB. As the NSL grows, the free amount scales with it.


Now we’re talkin’!


Yes this is the part I keep seeing. In that case it would be a safecoin/X cost and not a whole safecoin. I see safecoin as any other currency not tied to network cost, just able to pay for it.

+1 for your other aspects of this to.


Some measure like this will be the right one for sure.