Price difference between public and private data

The problem with fiat currencies and fractional reserve banking is that there will never be enough money to repay all the debt. Because both the original money (M) and the interest (I) have to be repaid so more money has to be created to repay the old debt, and then yet more money created to repay the new interest and so on. M < M + I.

However, the entities still believe that the debt could be paid back eventually. Otherwise there would be no trust and therefore no debt.

Debt only works when it is assumed by at least one that it is possible (if only in theory) to be repaid. Would the assumption be that the possibility of value generated for repayment could potentially come from the resources/products/services that the entity who is indebted can alone offer?

In other words, doesn’t the entity who is in debt have some sort of inherent value that is not based on fiat money?

Yes, I even heard that in the U.S. the birth certificates are used as bonds. So fiat currencies are implicitly backed by the citizens one could perhaps say.

So they are tied to the dollar. Land ownership that the country (US) with the fiat debt (dollars) controls also may be included in the inherent value. Those resources (people and land in this case) are tied to that specific country. Therefore the currency may be said to be backed by them.

Other fiat currencies then must necessarily have the same way of theoretically backing their currency. What they control (people and land) is what is generally assumed to back the given national currency of that country. Can those same resources be counted on as the direct foundation of any other currency at the same time? Or must they only belong to one country at any given time?

Of course there can be. Australia twice in the last 3 decades effectively brought their debt to almost zero, just didn’t because they wanted to do other things, even though they had the reserves to completely pay it off in the most recent case.

Exports can help bring in a lot of money from the income tax.

Just that governments love to keep their debts at certain levels and others mismanage the debt levels.

Okay, he finally revealed his true colors. I rest my case!
No further arguments are necessary.

I would like to quote Einstein on insanity, but let’s instead bastardize Winston’s saying: SAFE incentives will become reasonable when designers have exhausted all other resources.

Just recently I was wondering about the topic on proof of unique human - at the time I never understood what the hell was that all about (I thought some privacy/security thing). Only this week I realized it was an idea meant to fix another bad idea (freebies).

I also seem to recall that. Then 2 months ago someone told me how he was surprised that after such a long time here I still don’t get how rewards work.

Meme: Free Chunk of Spam in Every Vault!

1 Like

Yes, but we can look at the global situation of fractional reserve banking. If X amount of money is created as debt globally (isolated system) and Y interest. X + Y > X. It’s impossible to pay X + Y with X. Therefore new money has to be created in order to pay the interest. And more money needed to pay the new interest on top of the old interest and so on. In the video Money as Debt I posted earlier, they showed how this creates an exponential increase of the money supply.

Three hours ago he also claimed this:

I can’t be bothered to comment on his claims any more, I’ll just say that in the unlikely case that these ludicrous ideas are adopted, Safecoin would have all the weaknesses of today’s fiat currencies.


Fractional reserve banking is a workable model. The question is, will it continue to work or will the exponential inflation break the model as some point? A linear inflation is more sustainable. With free public storage the inflation of safecoin will follow the growth of the network. I think that’s an excellent model. Exponential inflation as in a fiat currency is prevented, and authorities are prevented from messing with the inflation rate.

So my point is, when fiat currencies have worked for so long even with an exponential inflation, then there is a good chance that a linear inflation will work too.

It’s not workable when we all know that debts cannot be returned, so it’s clearly a Ponzi scheme.

Nothing that grows exponentially is sustainable.
Even linear growth is not sustainable (as developed countries have discovered this century). And that is with the help of the fraudulent fractional banking system.

1 Like

In a real system the exponential growth starts to decline after a while, so it becomes like an s-curve. One potential problem with the linear inflation I propose is that data storage will become cheaper and cheaper! So if the farming reward stays the same over time, then that could be problematic I guess. Hmm… Would it be too complicated to make the farming reward decline over time, similar to bitcoin (without going to zero as in bitcoin)?

In my topic that’s been just closed I posted details (and a link official docs) about the farming rewards. They do gradually decline.

I think this Topic could be concluded: there is little (close to zero, really) support for cheaper (or free) public data and if that were to be implemented in any significant way the system would sooner or later collapse.

Based on this it seems safe to conclude that there is no need to subsidize certain categories of users.


Tell that to the general public. Or better yet, try to achieve a sufficient network effect without free public data storage. Good luck with that.

Realize that it’s not just me, it’s everyone on this Topic except you.
And we are the public.

It is important what the Project decides in terms of implementation and pricing, but we do know they recognize it’d be a problem and all attempts to “fix” that (which Neo listed above) so far IMO have been unsuccessful.

If am willing to bet that there will be no difference in pricing for public and private data in v1.0.


Ha, you are immobilized by imaginary attacker threats. Well, ok you could be correct. The SAFE network should be resistant to all possible attacks. That’s very important. I’m not so sure however that spamming a free public storage would be such a disaster. It could even be a sign of huge popularity!

Maybe David Irvine could weigh in and explain why he believed public storage could be made free to begin with.

Hey, wait a minute! The farming reward is random, right? So it doesn’t matter what data the farmers store. So if the farmer reward declines, as janitor said, then free public storage will only add to the safecoin inflation a bit, and 25% cost or free, take your pick, it doesn’t make much difference.

The solution then is to keep the current model and just reduce the 25% to 0%. That will make it possible to launch the SAFE network in 2017… eh, I mean in 2016.

You are lucky that there is no unlike button because you are going to be in the Guinness World Record.


All solutions to these types of problems have to be market driven, not decreed from above.

1 Like

Good point. Imagine if Larry Page would say: “Make people pay for Google Drive! No freebies here. Because I say so.” And then an employee says: “More people would use it if we have a free quota.” Larry replies: “How do you think we can pay for a free quota?! Our server farms cost millions of dollars and Eric Schmidt said that we are not allowed to put ads on Google Drive.”

1 Like

Nonsense. In google your data are their business.

1 Like