Could be a good idea. When Ron Paul talked about that I thought about having money backed by a basket of commodities and not just gold or silver. Today money is backed by nothing! I will do a search for videos with David Wiedemer.
@Anders, There was a reason SAFE went from a free upload model to its current one. Have you even read through those threads discussing it.
Simply making free uploads available in any amount and paying framers to store the data and pay them to supply the data will not work. And I am not going to redo those threads or show why, when its been said in this thread too.
If you wish to provide free uploads, and lets face it if it could be done and have the economics support it then I and I guess everyone else would support it. Rather like David in early 2014. But it is not simple, cannot be simply free uploads and pay farmers to store (which the dev team went away from because it cannot work without other difficult things)
What I am trying to say, take heed to the discussions, stop the circular reasoning that it will work because it will, and put your thinking cap on taking the input from the discussions and float ideas.
When you float an idea, take heed from those replying, resist the urge to just say “yes it can people will do this/that”, because they too have most likely tried to think of a way to do themselves, and likely can help you along that path. Even David encouraged you to work through to an answer. But answers rarely come when belief overrides very considered reasoning based on experience.
You need some hard figures from your model, you need to put your model to the test, consider cases where people are bastards and will deliberately try to break it. Consider WHY people would want to join, realise that any inflation in a model will only be far worse in reality.
Do some thinking, less dismissing and realise that its not a simple task to work out. The solution should not be overly complex but difficult to break and reward the right people.
2 Likes
If money is backed by nothing, why would other countries accept, for instance, the US Dollar as a promise to repay the debt owed that is symbolized by that dollar?
What I’m trying to lead to is: Is there some inherant value that (in this example) the US has or can produce that would lead the other countries to believe that a repayment is possible?
I still haven’t grasped the arguments against free public data. For example the arguments that the public data storage would be spammed too much seem unconvincing to me. And the arguments about too much inflation now seem wrong to me.
Money, like dollars, of course have a real value. It’s just that today fiat currencies are not backed by any physical resources. And that allows the fiat currencies to be inflated like crazy. The Federal Reserve creates trillions of dollars as a government debt or something like that. It’s basically money out of thin air.
But debt is still a promise to repay. And government debt is based on a promise to repay from future tax revenue. That tax revenue has to be coming from somewhere inside of the country. Would it then have to be coming from some inherent value that the US has or can produce? (Think property tax, income tax, sales tax)
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.
3 Likes
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.
2 Likes
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.
3 Likes