[Poll]: full OMNI to ERC20 swap

Right on! The last part also makes complete sense.

Thanks for the update and good to know where this stands :+1:

PS Does this have the support of the Maidsafe team?

1 Like

Right on. This is what I’ve wanted to see. If it’s locked and you can get it back (wrapped), then it’s not disposed of - or at least you can make a case for that.

There are some saying that tax isn’t a big deal and while I can’t speak for them personally, I think there is a global consideration here … IF we end up in a situation where we were forced to dispose en-mass, and presuming that many will have some considerable percent of tax taken here, this is effectively a mass forced-sell of tokens onto the market to cover tax … this means the governments are effectively going to drive the price down for everyone to some extent or another. I’m sure people will have their opinion on whether this is a big issue or not, but it is another consideration, so throwing it out there.

Much prefer reversible locked token solution for ALL cases as then we can at least make the argument (successful or not) that we haven’t disposed of anything.

1 Like

@Sotros25 I like that post above… a lot more than the title of the thread.

The point to be emphasised perhaps, is that the only commitment atm from Maidsafe is relative to Omni.

So what is not clear, is how the market in ETH20 actions a switch to network tokens.

for Omni: If Maidsafe is not going to have to create a blockchain to track how much of a balance against which private key has been swapped, then to be expected it’s necessarily either a burn or a snapshot.
Option 1of2 : A snapshot perhaps requires that the same private key works on the network as works on BTC:Omni and perhaps that’s possible, I don’t know. That would allow a sleepy owner to still own later on… and if owner is deceased this releases Maidsafe from proving a negative and engaging all users until can prove that all addresses have been swept. (thinking that visible are the public addresses… perhaps it’s a matter of being able to sign a message against that address with private key)
Option 2of2 : A burn is a choice by the user to send to a proved address, that cannot be owned but requires that all users action something, and I can’t see that is possible without a long term hold over Maidsafe for those users who are slow to catch on.
@JimCollinson do we know yet?

So, question - is ETH20 decentralised to the point that it does not need a market to make a transaction work? That is, what happens when a market in ETH20 collapses?.. do users have a private key that can always action a transaction or sign a message?

Is it true that no snapshot of ETH20 can occur?.. in which case perhaps Maidsafe cannot action a swap against ETH20 directly.
Does ETH20 have provable burn addresses?.. or perhaps contracts act in a similar proved way to destroy coins… whatever the option is for that needs to be known.

Because I wonder necessarily what you are moving towards, is a snapshot on Omni, that releases Maidsafe from its obligation AND a contract on Ethereum that allows ETH20 owners to burn.

The risk of not doing that, is that you have ETH20 holders who have not switched back at swap time and Maidsafe can only see Anchorage cold storage address or whatever they are doing as holding the pool that matches the ETH20 balance relative to Omni total coins… however see below, this might be useful.

Noting here, there is a risk there for requiring the setup of a provable not corruptible contract into safenetwork coin… so, we do not get slippage. Who is the expert we trust for that, is another question.

Perhaps the answer for ETH20 where Maidsafe can only see Anchorage’s address, is to see the ETH20 contract is provided the Ancorage safenetwork tokens directly - so, that Anchorage address is the exception that receives no tokens, and those tokens then fund swaps against the burns that ETH20 holders action, over as long a time as they want to.

Perhaps this also immediately creates the first market in safenetwork tokens, where the same contract is funded by those selling safenetwork tokens. It also provides a way to mitigate risk for those who want to hold ETH20 will be holding the same ETH20 that will exist on Ethereum after the swap has occured for allowing the market in Ethereum.

Would a contract on Ethereum stand for all time without needing to be maintained?..

Does all that make sense??..

:thinking: #offtopic


David has been copied on all correspondence with Wrapped. I believe he’s still onboard should Wrapped choose to move forward.


I’m thinking there are probably multiple options here, such as

  • People have to swap back to OMNI MAID to redeem SNTS.


  • People can swap back and forth up until a certain point post beta launch. Then, Wrapped burns the OMNI MAID they have custodied. MaidSafe honors the remainder of circulating OMNI and ERC20 MAID in the transition to SNTS.


  • People can swap back and forth between OMNI and ERC20 until beta launch. At beta launch, Wrapped burns the OMNI MAID they have custodied. MaidSafe honors the remainder of circulating OMNI and ERC20 MAID in the transition to SNTS.

I imagine there are likely other potential scenarios. In any case, Wrapped & Anchorage would also work with MaidSafe to create wrapped SNTS to facilitate exchange access until exchanges are able to trade native SNTS.

This is an interesting possibility.


As I say, it really all ends up coming back round to the launch of the Network, and the mechanisms that surround it. They are not merely limited to the trading of MAID.

Some of the these solutions are more complex than others.
Some involve trusting 3rd parties.
Some may (don’t @ me) have implications for tax, or other legals.
Some may open up privacy issues.
All should be considered and weighed up.
None of them are simple and easy; if they were, we’d have done it by now.

But (and thank you for those who have pointed it out already) we’re right in the middle of a pretty intense test net iteration cycle, so as you’ll appreciate this is not at the top of the agenda right now. Although that does not mean it’s unimportant, or we don’t care about it, or we haven’t been discussing it.


I am both massively in favor and massively against this proposal - not helpful I know…

I really agree with the earlier @Guybrows comment that it very much depends on the roadmap and speed of this project…

I fully agreed and respected the view of the Maidsafe team that asking for timelines was not helpful up until testnet… but perhaps now this approach was the past. We are almost fearful of asking the question for being seen as unhelpful / pestering or at best micro-managing. I fully understand.

Perhaps after a few testnets over the next coming month, the Team will be able to give us what they think is a reliable roadmap and timeline (conservatively, of course) and then this helps enable decision making. Simply: this year, let’s wait, next year or beyond: let’s aim to get the Erc-20 weapons out.

I don’t want to put any more pressure on the team, but in a positive way ask the amazing team if asking for estimated timings is now a constructive possibility.


I understand. I would say we are in a new mode, one that nobody has seen before of MaidSafe. We are iterating releases at pace, not testing in house and wondering if this is good enough, but just launching! It’s brave, it’s insane and it’s opening us up for all our dirty laundry in public, but we are no feart any longer (that type of management died a while back)! We are doing this right and doing it fast as we can in the open.

That is my politician answer for your question. We will all see in real time launch approach, we will all see the progress in real time and we will all be able to guess “when launch”. I am not trying to deflect, but I am seriously letting everyone know, we will all know together and all have our own opinions, but we, MaidSafe will have no secrets to give us any better a timeline than anyone else.

We are moving so fast if folk take a day or 2 off they have no idea what we did and what worked.

However, in saying all that, I feel this pace is mental, it should kill the team and burn them out, but the reward of seeing folk try it out, find bugs, give constructive criticism and more importantly fixes (thanks again for the win bug @vort ) along with valuable research ( @mav and others) means we take that energy on board. So instead of burn out there is excitement, happy to have another day another testnet.

It’s all about not only finding bugs (we do) and fix them (we do), plus testing the core fundamentals (they work) it’s also finding the gold we missed. A great example is we screwed up some connectivity thing, forced us to think, we realised "hey!! bloody hell, Adults do not need to be reachable. That means everyone can farm, everyone can earn coins and that means not only Secure Access For everyone it also means Secure Earning. The ability for poorer folk to not only access info, but to earn with commodity computers arrived out of a “bug”.

The more of these the better.

So when launch. well I would say when you see us slow down and code changing less, activity slowing, testing increasing we are nearly there. From that point I would “get ready” as it will happen in an instant.


On a separate note, I think that exchanges and liquidity is a compete luxury at the moment. The main barrier to me recommending SN to people is a simple off-exchange wallet. I know that there have been many helpful comments regarding setting things up, but they all seem to be fraught with ‘it’s super easy but dont press this button’ responses.

Perhaps one of the best or practical ways to increase adoption would be to lobby Trezor, et al, for native wallet support - rather than looking for exchanges.


Thank you @dirvine. There is nothing ‘dirty’ in what you and the team are doing - it’s both brave and logical - it excites the community. You have made difficult decisions and they are paying off. Nobody wants undue pressure on the team - we can both feel and see visually their commitment.

I suggest to the community that we take a pragmatic pause on this very useful discussion - and reassess in a while once we see some more testnets come through.

Generally speaking I think we underestimate the liability that Maidsafe would have if anything other than the existing Omni coin is available.

For that reason we owe it to the team to see progress and allow time, but of course re-appraise it a later stage.


Switching away from omni is a multifaceted issue but I want to clarify one particular point I don’t know the answer for - is each conversion from omni to the new system an individual ethereum transaction? Or is it batched / offchain?

Reason I ask is eth fees are very high just like bitcoin fees:

btc avg tx fee 21.07 usd/tx vs eth avg tx fee 18.90 usd/tx


I love finding gold nuggets on this forum like this too! :exploding_head: You have to read all the threads here to get the treasure! :sweat_smile:


BTW, to add - I think test nets are the best form of marketing of all. To get to see these iterations burst into life is an amazing and interactive experience, which draws us all into the journey. I don’t think it’s just me either, as the price has been steadily rising with anticipation too!


We can use ETH sidechain for the distribution. A transaction there is less than 1 cent.

Privacy. Security. Freedom

1 Like

Trezor support Omni and therefore MAID, maybe you know that and are talking about SNT but I want to clarify for anyone reading.

1 Like

Thanks @happybeing but unless I have completely missed something, it’s not simply a case of slamming in the Trezor and sending the Maid over, or even to the BTC wallet address? Anything more complicated than that is a high barrier to entry.


In fact, that’s right. It’s so easy, see the pictures in the manual:

Privacy. Security. Freedom


Not fully. I can’t use a bitcoin address with 1 in the title to receive and to send I have to use some strange website on GitHub. To people outside of this group, they’re already lost. This is not ‘Turnkey’ by any stretch of the imagination - respectfully.

1 Like

To be fair, it is very simple to send it TO the Trezor, but sending FROM the Trezor is a bit more of a hassle…at least compared to sending BTC. I wouldn’t say it is difficult, but it isn’t as simple as sending from a true native wallet. For example, if you are trying to do a swap at Changelly, you can’t just send the MAID from the Trezor to Changelly, you have to remove it from the Trezor with omni first.

Edit: I was under a wrong impression about the preceding paragraph. Please see the following responses before dismissing the Trezor as a hassle.

As I understand it, it is no different than using Trezor than for any other currency. Am I mistaken?