Of Maidsafe & Blockchains, Rust & C++

You used “nice guys” not me, and I’ve referred you to what you missed in my post but you ignore it again and accuse me of spinning. You’re now verging on trolling so have a good day.

I said “reduced it”, and that was the spinning I referred to, not the whole post.

Sorry, I didn’t catch your answer but it’s not necessary. I don’t troll, you have a good day too.

Microsoft does datachains?!?!?!?!?
PLEASE do not use “MS” like that. My poor wee heid near exploded…

Microsoft = M$, not MS…:wink:

MS = MaidSafe…

Is MaidSafe…

Yeah I know - but at first glance I was confused

Entirely up to you guys but the confusion factor - especially for n00bs - between MS and M$ is too high. IMHO *



*Opinions are like assholes - We all have one and many of them stink

1 Like

MS == microshit. It has been for last two decade.

Use a different acronym for maidsafe, other than MS.

Maidsafe is the first “crypto” to use Rust. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I would wait until data chains are actually existing.


Next time I use MS I think you’ll know what I mean. But Im going to try and spell it out in full, for the noobs

I’m not sure at all the either IS the future. I think it likely that both will be IN the future for the foreseeable future, so I see no need to thump chests and talk about superiority of data chains when we can’t do them yet, though blockchains have a track record.

As much as we are in agreement about the massive impact the SAFE Network will have, it’s a bit early to start discount what’s already there working. Aside from the chances of egg meeting face, from an external perspective it’s a matter of believers and non-believers. Not a good foundation for a tech PR move. I think MaidSafe has learned that, and I certainly know I have. We’ve all had to apply the napkin.:blush:


Conversion, non-believers to believers. That’s effective marketing and an excellent "reason " for tech PR move. Unless you are not confident. I dont subscribe to the “we already tried it” and maintain much more can be done to elevate awareness and draw more of the right people​ to MS.

There is a difference between being confident and objectively credible on a broader basis. Timing is the variable. I’m just saying that timing for an all-out bid for superiority is a bit off just now.


Agree, but this project cannot be timed, as evidenced by its current state. You say too early, so there must be a too late as well. So when is it best to shoot for, too early or too late?

1 Like

Certainly too early for a hard sell, but not too early for building understanding, what in marketing is called ‘thought leadership’ (yuk). I like the idea of a non-technical explainer on datachains and what problems with blockchains and consensus in general they are designed to address - in part because I’m not too clear myself. So long as it’s not bigging things up too much before they’re ready, which I think is the worry of some on this thread, that could only be a good thing.


Instead of the bickering over blockchains v datachains, why not simply use Distributed Consensus Mechanism -DCM ?

Top level design need only specify that some form of DCM is used - and who knows, perhaps other useable examples apart from blockchain and datachain may emerge?

I don’t think there’s a need to convince people with such statements. Blockchains won’t go away first decades and they’re fine for different purposes.

What are you going to say if speed of the safenetwork even doesn’t come close to things like ipfs, zeronet,… networks?

Did you already see test from @mav showing results this fast ???
Maybe it’s even impossible to get there with the optimizations done?
Can U say for sure ?

I have great trust in this project and even without the speed of other’s there will be many use cases but let’s definitely not promote us as the ultimate and best solution for all and everything.

Even if it was the case we shouldn’t shout it at others because people will notice it by themself.
I always prefer deeper explanations to the ones that want them but never throw statements into the world without respect for others.

Crypto is great and there are many great ones out there, also non-maidsafes…


In fact the basic and most important difference is Distributed Vs Decentralized. That is the key that we should try to get people to understand.

Decentralised is that more users means more resilience but the same, or even less, capability.

Distributed is that more users means more resilience and more capability.


What about adding an article about MaidSafe(Coin) on Wikipedia?
Still to soon?

I’ve checked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_wizard, and I have a (lame?) excuse to not do it: conflict of interest, because decent amount invested.

I checked when MaidSafeCoin was still in the top 10 on https://coinmarketcap.com and all the other (maybe 1 not) in the top 10 had a Wikipedia article.

If I would make that article, I should take the following points into account

  • Look at the other Cryptocurrency articles for inspiration

  • gather a lot of more or less ‘respected’ (‘third party’ of course) references

  • Built a short ‘objective’ fact-base story around this (with everything covered by the references). With of course the necessary links, like maidsafe.net.

EDIT: on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Applied_arts_and_sciences/Computer_science,_computing,_and_Internet#The_Internet ‘I see MaidSafe (software libraries) – A suite of Dual Licensed libraries in c++ …’ --> seems like an outdated request to me :sweat_smile:


Awesome idea!

Never to soon.

Make the wiki any way you see fit. Lots of people here will jump to help you / critique it with you. But its your baby.

Good on you.

1 Like