RFC: Safecoin Implementation

We have $7,8 million of Safecoin around. Should be enough to start the network if you ask me. I wouldn’t mind to give some of my coins away to people who want to get an account. Especially friends and family. Another point to make is that Safecoin will be created as more people surf the network. So when Safecoin is implemented and we already have like a few thousand users, coins would start to show up on the network. If we only have 200 users, the option of creating coins for new account can always be looked at again.


I pretty much convinced my entire family to buy MAID themselves, including my mother. Though I wonder whether they did because they recognize the potential or to just to get me to shut up about it.


I would agree that there is plenty of MaidSafeCoin to bootstrap the network.

@Seneca during the creation of MaidSafeCoin, everyone also has MScoin-test for an equal amount; if I’m not mistaken. Perhaps that can be used, rather than already burning your own MaidSafeCoins ? :smile:


I support divine’s idea. We should test first before going live. So it makes sense to give everybody free 50 fakecoins for testing purpose. We have to test everything to make sure it is looks good, ready to rock and roll. That’s exactly what bitcoin did back in 2009. They tested and tested and tested.


so we will transfer maidsafe to safe very soon?

1 Like

The first test safecoin won’t be during this sprint, but possibly by the end of the following sprint - so a few weeks to test safecoin. Then there will be a lot of testing, and no doubt some features to finish off before it will be feasible to begin moving MaidSafecoin to the network. My guess is we are still months away from that rather than weeks, but things are coming together quickly now.


IIRC any and all test-SC gets turned into real-SC once the network decides to make the switch…

That could make a smooth transition and reduce the chicken/egg problem aka "nobody has coins, therefore can’t put data into safe. "

But that means it’s gamed. I could create thousands of accounts, 50,000 safecoins for free. Why not!


Would it be possible to allow free puts to bootstrap the network instead of free Safecoins.


Yeah. It would be cool to have a safe testnet, and safe actualnet. Bitcoin has a test network, you could easily generate bitcoins without the need to mine bitcoins. It skips that algorithm, so it allows you to test the transactions, and such.

Wouldn’t that defeat the testing of safecoin? Or am I missing what you have in mind - why are you suggesting this alternative?


But there are likely to be resets between the very first safecoin testing and the last safecoin test. We will not know how many resets and which test run will be the last.

I would agree to the first test being given x amount of testcoin since I am sure that it will not be the last test. From the first test (or n th test) we will have a much better idea on how to bootstrap the system.

Maybe (guessing) the last test (still a test) will be just one coin to allow the account to be created and have some upload ability. In other words that coin is given then recycled on account creation, so noone can game the test with multiple accounts and hoard the coin, they can only upload data and get the ball rolling.


It is very important to note that that is can only be accepted for testing purposes: the whole crowdsale is explicitly to solve the initial bootstrap and coin distribution problem, as also pointed out by @polpolrene. During testing of course anything is possible.

both are sort of equivalent. For example on the pre-release every account was by default initiated with some (I don’t even remember) 100GB of allowed storage capacity, so that it effectively isn’t present.

I was suggesting that instead of giving away Safecoin to solve the chicken and the egg problem, storage could be given away for a short time to bootstrap the network. Am I correct in assuming farmers need puts to acquire gets to earn Safecoin, but you can’t put with out Safecoin and you can’t earn Safecoin with out puts? Hence the chicken and the edge conundrum.

It’s pretty much the same thing, the client accounts would be credited “as if they had paid X safecoin”, so this achieves the same goal really. The suggestion is not to give safecoin to anyone if that helps :wink:


…but then it turns into real safecoin after the last reset and the network is launched? Doesn’t sound kosher to me.

It should absolutely not, I fully agree. It would not be kosher, or acceptable for that to happen. This very easily assured. Any test-safecoin can be be carried under a different StructuredData type_tag (I believe 5u64 is currently reserved for safecoin).

That way any test-safecoin that would drip into any real network would not be recognised as safecoin (carrying type_tag 355547976u64 for example)


Same here, the now closed topic of mine:

1 Like

I see the principle, and don’t have strong feelings in the other direction, but given the value of a few Safecoin (50 is what? Less than $1 and would add up to an insignificant amount relative to the issued coin), it seems not worth worrying about. And why not let those helping test the network with a little reward anyway?

I’m not intending to start a debate over this question, I’m challenging what seem to me unnecessarily hard lines regarding something so trivial in impact.

So I’m wondering if I’m missing something here. Is this just principle as I suspect?

Do you think this principle needs to be so sacrosanct?

Is it based in a fear of being duped, or of giving a bad impression, or…?

Or could this be an overly idealistic position?

I’d like to understand this better, thanks.