Overall this is great to see.
It will take a long time to digest.
What exactly is a StoreCost ? Is it number of SafeCoin per one PUT ?
Agreed, please please please put units on this in the RFC. Maybe a short worked example could be handy. A simple change but imo very important.
My assumption is storecost units would be “SAFE per PUT” (smaller number means cheaper PUTs)
“This formula [for storecost] will very likely need to be refined”
Yes for sure it will need to change.
StoreCost is tied to section size, which is basically constant (between 100 and 200, as described in Future Enhancements). Section size is never going to get ‘really big’ so storage will never be ‘really cheap’. That’s a mistake.
If full nodes (F) is zero most of the time (a fair assumption considering the incentives of the network) then StoreCost is effectively 1/N.
Maybe introducing prefix length to the formula would help since that would allow a large network (total vaults) to be considered, rather than just section size which doesn’t say anything about the actual available space on the network.
I realise this sounds quite critical, but I’m just pushing for cheap storage as much as possible since that’s potentially a unique feature for SAFE.
Probably a lot more to delve into here but that’s my surface impression of the formula.
“The Core Developers of the SAFE Network are awarded 5% of the total”
This is way too much.
If this happened in bitcoin, MaidSafe would have received 826,150 btc by now. I can’t see how that’s justified. Especially since SAFE will overall be worth a lot more than BTC.
Maybe if there was a plan for spending, or plan for the governance of these coins, or the far-future implications then I’d be a bit more ok with it. But if spending from the core pool of funds ever drops then that 5% will start to accumulate really fast.
It’s great to have a mechanism sustainability of development and stimulus for economic activity - that’s awesome - but I’m needing quite a bit of convincing this technique is the right one.
Let’s compare to Visa… a fee of approx 2% per transaction gives them US$18 billion revenue. Can MaidSafe spend $18 billion per year? I guess so but it’s a fairly big question I feel.
Is PUT Balance no longer there? ie all PUT will result in direct deduction of safecoin from the uploader CoinBalance (using the current StoreCost calculated for the PUT)?
There seems to be an incentive for users to have multiple CoinAccounts spread fairly evenly across XOR space for large accounts. This way no single section controls all the funds for that user. Makes for an interesting bit of whale wallet design optimisation perhaps?!
I support @neo with fixed point integers. No amount of hiding the details will prevent people from trying to abuse them and burning themselves or others. A single u64 is my preference (decimal point can go wherever probably no decimal is better!). Not a super strong preference, since I appreciate the engineering desire to maximise the use of digital space.
But usability cannot be ignored, and libraries or abstractions won’t fix, say, ‘advanced’ excel users.