Poll: Should MaidSafe implement PtP (Pay the Producer)?


Caching and electricity costs.


Poll shows 58% for PtP in some form and 34% against.


Originally there was no token on the Safe Network, no Safecoin, no rewards. That came later and the concept for rewarding popular content was born from there…PtP in late 2015 was not the genesis for rewarding popular content.

The fat lady is warming up out the back.


Who are you to “say” anything?

MaidSafe is not your project, unless you’re making it, and the people who are making it see the amazing opportunity PtP can have for the world so they’re definitely going to experiment with it and make it work.

Don’t try to mess with that, you have no right


A man with an opinion who found an unlocked topic?

Where did I make this claim?[quote=“whiteoutmashups, post:310, topic:5805”]
MaidSafe is not your project, unless you’re making it, and the people who are making it see the amazing opportunity PtP can have for the world so they’re definitely going to experiment with it and make it work.

My understanding is that this idea did not originate from any of the creators. This was an idea that was sourced from the crowd, and as part of the crowd I’m not challenging any core developer’s innovation. I’m challenging an Idea that originated from the crowd.


I don’t have a right to challenge ideas?

Surely I’ve challenged more ideas than this one on this same exact forum and I’ve never been met with this kind of defensiveness, and I’ve actually respect a lot of what you’ve contributed on these forums.

So I’m actually just going to step back and revisit what I wrote that would merit this kind of response.


@dirvine was the source of the concept. He wanted to change the way creators are rewarded and devised the idea to provide a small payment to them when people actually got their works.


Adding to that, the rewards idea was that

Farmers are rewarded for supplying data to the requester.
App Devs are rewarded when people find their APPs useful
Creators are rewarded when they provide content people use

The 3 rewards are like a triangle of keeping the network healthy. Without any of Farmers, App Devs or Useful content creators (uploaders) the network will not be healthy.

Not enough farmers, the storage system fails to store content
Not enough APP devs, people have too few Apps to find network useful
Not enough quality content, people find the network uninteresting

So by providing incentives for all 3 sides of the triangle it encourages a healthy and balanced network. All three aspects are important, otherwise people in general will be ultra slow to adopt SAFE if at all.

Any of the 3 reward incentives can be “gamed” to provide extra income to some who might try. But because of caching and the rewards only being small they all require the whole network to find them useful before the rewards outweigh the costs. Thus “gaming” may profit some for a small time, but overall its unlikely to be worth the resources the gamer expends on it. There are much more profitable ways to use those resources and we can see parallels on the clearnet for gaming these sorts of rewards and we rarely see it happen because of the ROI is too small compared to other uses of the resources.


Good point.[quote=“neo, post:313, topic:5805”]
was the source of the concept. He wanted to change the way creators are rewarded and devised the idea to provide a small payment to them when people actually got their works.

Okay, I’m not sure how I got it in my head that it was an idea that originated from the crowd. From my perspective I was more concerned with folks that wanted to infuse the safe network with their own particular flavour of economics that in turn gave rise to this feature.

I find rest in the fact that this has Dirvine’s guidance and inspiration. I’ll study it out further to see if I can catch his brainwave.


Okay, I see there they’re already anticipating that some “gaming” might occur and it’s a matter of mitigation. Now I’m curious. I’ll travel further up the thread to find out more.


Most likely you picked up that idea because others have said it (hopefully they said it in ignorance and not to deceive)



Farming - create a centralised farming pool using spare computers (say a large datacentre owner)

APP Devs - create Apps that are bloated and advertise them so people think they are good

PtP - upload tons of content with the PtP pay address and advertise it so people download it.

But all three require significant resources and if one tries to “do it themselves” by continuously “GETting” the content/Apps/vault-chunks then they run into caching that will defeat them. The bandwidth/electricity costs will typically be much higher than the rewards they get.

But then those resources can be used to game something else on the internet to earn a whole lot more money than any rewards on SAFE would give. The ROI on SAFE would be too small for the gamers since caching etc defeats their rewards.

Of course this all needs testing to verify this and that is what the dev team want to do with testsafecoin and the alpha releases

The rewards rely on the GETs being from a widely distributed user base and not some (semi)centralised gamer. And this is a major reason why gaming is one of diminishing returns. Also need volume of GETs to make it profitable and a gamer simply cannot do it and caching ensures that


From the way I understood it when I first looked into PtP a while back. It did not sit well with me at all. It seemed to me a way to exploit the network and derail everything.

In fact it’s been bothering me every time I see that this thread has been updated with another post, but did not want to comment until I could sit down and read through it all to fully understand.

I usually lurk a thread till I nail down all sides of a topic.
But this time I jumped the gun :slight_smile:

Thanks for highlighting @neo I appreciate it.


And I must reiterate that this needs testing to confirm one way or the other as to its suitability

Maybe another method of rewarding the creator (content provider) will be required if this proves unsuitable in testing.


Actually interpreting the result as “mostly for PtP” is misleading. There is no implementation, so the people who generally agreed or disliked it commented on the basic idea of rewardIng while the folks who voted “depending on implementation” are undecided since depending on the implementation they could be either for or against.

I am against the idea that the network can be used to massively subsidize pirated content for PR reasons. I can totally live with it if developers decide to take another rout. However what I really dislike is that here on the forum people market the concept as “Pay the Producer” while it is actually “Pay the Promoter”. The promoter CAN be the originator but doesn’t have to be. Classic association fallacy. There is NO way the system could automatically relate data with their creator. Let’s at least be honest with what we are discussing here.


@dirvine was explicit in ackowledging this very fact from the time he presented the term ‘PtP’ so there’s no dishonesty.

Then others will say, but existing data can be uploaded (like a hit song from today) and the up-loader gets rewarded, not the artist. This is true and probably cannot be helped, I am not sure we want to.

However, any new artist / producer of content (like web site/blog etc…) who uses SAFE as a mechanism to share gets paid, as they should. If the artist does not want this they can send a ‘delete’ for the chunks, they will get removed from the producer field.

This then means we don’t care who copies the metadata and promotes it as the payment is on content. So we encourage new sites (on SAFE) to display the stuff, whatever it is.



Someone correct my bad logic here, but what’s going to prevent me from throwing about a 1,000 raspberry pis in an unfinished basement with a script that will create new accounts periodically to go visit content I specify? AKA money tree aka new breed of rothschilds.

As I have pointed out many times: profitabity.

If you think this will profit you, go ahead.

If you want to argue this is why PtP should be abandoned now, please demonstrate to us that it will probably be profitable.

Until then, accept we won’t know until it has been explored further, and probably not until it has been tested.

The lack of proper reasoning behind arguments that this should be dropped now (before any testing) suggests to me that these views are based on preconceived ideas, rather than thought through considered opinions. This has more in common with a propaganda campaign than I would hope to find in this community. Just keep saying “PtP bad” and it will die. That’s a form of censorship is it not?

I hope we’re better than that and will base that decision on something more credible and reasoned.


I keep bringing this up, because nobody else seems to:

PtP is indispensable for service providers.

All of us use Google or similar services, because information is useless unless it is found. One may argue that curated lists can be a substitute, and I may agree that they can – up to a point, when maintaining them becomes a burden, or when they get abandoned, etc.

As I outlined in a thread, there will be ways to build sophisticated search features on top of the Safe network that are on par with those running on the clear net, but they will require posting a large number of SD blocks. In other words, operating this hugely beneficial service will cost a lot of money for the provider.

PtP solves this problem beautifully:

  1. a provider uploads a lot of data, and pays for it
  2. if the community finds this data useful, it starts using it
  3. provider gets some coins, can upload more data
  4. (optional) provider can now pay for rent, send kids to college, visit the maldives (while it’s still above sea level), etc.

If there’s no PtP, there’s no way to reclaim the costs of posting all that useful data, so it will never happen: we basically outruled the very existence of a whole class of services that are crucial for the success and usefulness of the Safe network. Not good.

Before somebody suggests “oh but they could just raise funds or accept tips!” let me ask you: out of the (possibly) few dozen successful search attempts a day, how many times do you go like “wow, I got good results, let me see how I could support this search engine with my money” :scream_cat:


"Beyond release MaidSafe, either alone or working in partnership with other developers, will start to create some of features below that will offer both developers and end users access to some exciting new tools, such as:

Pay the producer"

I am unclear, if PtP will be implemented after the full release of the SAFE network will this be at the developer App level or the core? If at the core than people will have the option to upgrade correct?


It really easy solved with a PtP vault that is installed with launcher, when one is surfing the safe network it should leave a trial of micro payments behind.

So the PtP vault would have a small farming vault caching the network and would be a cost to the user when using the safe network. maybe a 20 megabyte vault or what ever a android phone device can easy handle by setting your own level on a slider.
It would be nice to compare with BTC fees faster transaction or Ptp vault capacity the faster you get downloads…


Problem is that David is wrong on this one and several people already pointed that out. David made a difference between content prior to SAFE and content that was released on the network. However if you are a media network you can easily spot content, release it with minor changes to receive the reward and then promote it throughout the network. So anything new in this process of skimming surplus of creators…