RFC: Safecoin Implementation


#83

A socialist or communist community can function inside of a libertarian society. The exclusion is created by the socialists. It’s very simple, IMO. But despite that people belabor the need for “tolerance”, as if libertarians care how some community organizes itself. Of course, libertarians don’t care. The call for tolerance is there merely to fool those who’d like to get out of the statist slavery system we live in.

But we got way to far from the topic, so here’s my attempt to say something on the topic of SAFE giveaway: earlier in this topic I suggested that a captcha-driven Web registration system would be not less unjust than give-aways based on self-installation, but it would be somewhat harder to exploit. Even the lowest-tech approach possible - giving free testnet coins to those who got at least one like (or if you want to accept more, posted) on this forum - beats the proposed approach. Or an equally simple approach, to include those whose addresses have more than (say) 10K MAID and who broadcast they want to test.

If the freebies won’t continue into mainnet (somebody above said they won’t, which I seriously doubt but let’s assume that’s true) then this approach is incomprehensible because at this (testnet) stage if we want few hundred participants, there is no problem organizing and managing proper giveaways.

Additionally, small give-aways could be done to those tho translate docs, how-to’s, etc. and get things done. Even if it’s poorly managed, it’s better than to throw coins away which is the current plan. Something would get done. But instead of rewarding contribution in labor, the RFC is calling for giveaways. That is a total disaster, IMO.


#84

This is very true. There is nothing wrong with people pooling resources. It is the compulsory nature of contributions which is the issue.


#85

Will you earn SAFE Coin if you delete data from the SAFE Network?


#86

Unknown at this time. It hasn’t been written (that part of the SAFEcoin RFC afaik)

And any plans for refunding (a portion) of the SAFEcoin used to store the data has not been suggested by David or any of the dev team.

A refund would require knowing how much you paid in the first place. If you used current prices then I would store a ton of data when the price is really really low (< 1 x 10^-15 per PUT) then delete when the price is at 1x 10^-5 and make a huge profit. In other words playing stock market with data. Not good for the network, so the network has to remember what you paid for storing the data then refund only a portion of it and that way people cannot game the system

And for MD data I would say no refund since it costs the network any time you operate (add/change/delete) on a MD


#87

I’m not really sure how data deduplication works with regard to cost, but if it still costs SAFEcoin to save stuff that isn’t unique (like a film or tv show) then obviously getting refunds for deleting that stuff wouldn’t work. I’ve always presumed you still get charged for saving data, even if the network doesn’t have to duplicate the storage.


#88

It has been confirmed a few times that storing immutable will cost the PUT cost even if dedup means no actual storing occurs.

The delete suggested is to have upto 20 “owners” and after 20 it cannot be deleted. Then as each delete occurs the owner is removed and the chunk is only deleted when no more owners are there.

But I don’t know the state of that now since it introduces ownership of chunks and that was never meant to be. So it might have been scraped. I just don’t know.


#89

I wouldn’t be going live for a few weeks yet. The market is scared at present


#90

Yeah SAFE coin tokens will really test the network and that is what interests me personally. Seeing it allocate coins, and people using SAFE to transact as well as no doubt the attacks that will unfold. Will be very very interesting.


#91

Market schmarket. SAFE coin was never designed for the market. If the markets want to take advantage good for them go for it.
Maidsafe and the people using and behind the SAFE net could care less about the market. That’s the beauty of it. 99% of all other altcoins where designed with money making and market trading, not MAID or the future SAFE coin.


#92

So why bother listing


#93

Why not?

Also because people want to buy extra, or those wanting to sell spare. Obviously traders will attempt to play the market. Just that the design was never based in the market, but as a network resource purchase/supply


#94

So are you saying they know exactly how much they need to fund the development. If they do then they must have a timeline in mind. But by the look of it there is no timeline. So the higher the price the easier it is to raise funds when they need it.


#95

No I didn’t say that.

Maidsafe get nothing from the trading that goes on in any exchange.

The funding came from the original sale of MAID and from the banktothefuture share sale.


#96

Will they need any more funding


#97

Maybe yes, maybe no.


#98

Which I unfortunately missed out on!


#99

Reminds me about safex who else is making a fortune on safex?

Good time to flip them for maidsafecoins

I just cracked open my crowdsale purchase http://omnichest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=1GCkjipkrz8W1LKWrWkTGbNsQiymXM7ztB


#100

the market is fundamental to the success of the safe network - without that it would be destined to be as popular as freenet and as responsive as tor


#101

I wonder why safex is doing so well - ive made more on safex than in all my maidsafecoin investments :thinking:


#102

SAFEx/EXsafe seems to still be 150+% lower than it’s ATH? You could have sold it at over 400 sats while it was still linked to SAFEnet last year, so it doesn’t look to be doing all that well relative to other things. Still only 15btc of orders.

SAFEx has nothing to do with safe btw… it’s a blockchain-based solution competing with open bazaa etc. Most blockchain based ideas are getting some attention atm. It can’t be related to maidsafe in any way though. It is not a SAFE asset. :grinning: