SAFE Network Dev Update - April 16, 2020

Well if you end up contributing let me attempt to clarify a bit more for you to pass on to others, from one regular person to another. These subsets aren’t arbitrarily put in between major releases and it is literally just progress that would have had to happen on the way to that major release anyway. So no extra stops or wastes of time or gimmicks. The difference is that they are able to test it along the way in a coherent manner and let the community get their hands dirty and get a grasp on API’s (how their apps can take advantage of the networks features to accomplish the apps purpose).

Overall it’s beneficial to both Maidsafe and community devs. They get the hang of improving QA and release process, streamlining etc, get community feedback, community devs get a head start which should help the network launch with apps and so on and so fourth.

Looking forward to see what you come up with!


Ask yourself how many of the threads giving up and coming projects to watch for in coming years have any substance to them or where the originator hasn’t been paid off.

1 Like

Now wouldnt that have been great! Not sayin’ fbook didnt bring some decent things and maybe sped up the process (in a postive way? :thinking:) but I am sure something else would have come along. VC’s bring along a whole set of problems. It seems to me devs have the community on their side now more than ever, this is way better than a VC bringing in paper and their own personal interests.

Dev speed is HUGE, these are exciting times and we are just in the beginning. The “Baby” part tells us that. The company has matured and is unfolding even more very rapidly. It’s just a process and everyone should be learning and growing. Babies eventually learn to crawl, then walk and then stand up straight. If left alone they fall down and get up again, learning from their mistakes, and eventually grow into a strong independent being. What is key to this is having people around them that show them love and compassion no matter their mistakes, as hard as that may be at times.

It is fair to have worries and concerns but when we impose our concerns on babies, normally with the best of intentions, we just stunt their growth and in the long run create a weak individual.

Not attacking your concerns, just making an analogy.


Yeah, that’s pretty much the way it works. Software is not written, it is developed. Wait until you discover that software is never finished.


Haha well I did know that already unfortunately. That was what my comment was based on earlier in the thread about the convergence of tech and finance and while I understand you sometimes get a less than ideal product, at least to start, having VC or PE money involved essentially forces a release. The feeling is sometimes people just need to know that a product or a shell of one even exists. Adoption at some point has to be tangible. None of this new news, just a reiteration of it which I think is helpful as a reminder to reality. I’m also not the one coding 16 hours a day, so I get it.


Most products suck because they are forced. Just look at the outputs from establishment where the contributions of so many stakeholders force… something.

Naturally evolved product, is always a better quality and stands better the test of time for being more robust.


I get your point and your recent replies are far more constructive than the original one that I jumped down your throat on - apologies.

The essential point you are missing however is this: Similar in some ways to Bitcoin, the first release of the SAFE network is going to have to hit the ground running and not just be very robust but impervious. Close enough is NOT good enough, unlike most other software that takes many iterations to be truly fit for purpose.
Just like the freshly built Soviet T-34 tanks that rolled out of the factory in Stalingrad and immediately into action on their very doorstep, thus turning the tide against the Nazis and ultimately saving civilisation as we know it, the first release of SAFE network will be attacked from all sides but will be a formidable weapon for good. We owe it to society to get it not just nearly right but as close to total fitness for purpose as humanly possible. Because ANY and EVERY chink will be exploited by “them”.
We are ALL frustrated and want this yesterday but we must all realise that a premature release that can be shown to have a minor flaw will mean the entire project attacked from all sides and thus it will fail.
Everything tells me we are nearly there and just need to have a little more patience and help out where we can, whether with testing, conventional marketing, social media posts whatever. And yes, there is a role there for the money guys too :slight_smile:

Thank you to David Irvine and all the devs, thank you to the designer, builders and crews of the T-34, thank you to the Red Army, the Soviet people and their leaders - each of you in their own way have saved or will save civilisation.

1 Like

Unfair assumption… and we’re not at war.

There is no reason it should be attacked and even a fail on the first release is not a big deal - it’s unlikely the first release untested would be the one to host monetary value. It needs to be robust but getting there is inevitably a iterative process.

SAFE is for everyone… commies and nazis :open_mouth:
Everyone by rights, should be doing everything, to help ensure its success.

The problems between people are a difference level, than base. Give people air to breathe and they will have a chance to make a better world; selfish people might not like that but hey - there’s always some losers.

It’s like having an opinion… two people or many groups will have the same opinion about many topics and propositions; it’s the difference where it becomes interesting.

The analogy I should have suggested above perhaps is the difference between the old internet and the new. The old is an unconsidered test of what was possible and compromised is so many ways that it fails in fundamental ways to support what is widely good for people. SAFE is a more considered take on how what we know is possible and how it can be done so much better.

Of course there will be those who miss the point - but SAFE is for everyone, even those who miss the point.

1 Like

Sorry I should have made that MUCH clearer, the first release that will actually have SAFEcoin with real monetary value. My bad.

Absolutely - and this is why it really will make a difference - IF we get it right and do not allow ourselves to be rushed into compromises. Of course the perfect is the enemy of the good, but I trust David Irvine and his team to make the necessary judgement calls on the fine details.

Nonsense… unless you mean good intentions… and beware those, for being the enemy of reality; perfection; and Good.

Small evils for the greater good is fallacy.

Reality, is perfect; is Good.

1 Like

BY this analogy, should I understand you to mean that we do not release until EVRERYTHING is perfect?

I think there is very wide spectrum of grey here.
@waveman352 - for his own good reasons is fairly close to one end of it, wanting something out very soon to hit the market and start gaining immediate traction. Myself who wants it right, fit for purpose, secure, resilient, sufficiently performant as to be competitive but willing to accept small compromises if we can confidently show that these compromises can be done away with very soon indeed and IIUC you now want every i dotted, t crossed and no short-cuts at all?

Apologies if I have misunderstood you.

I was critiquing that premise that you seemed to be parroting “the perfect is the enemy of the good”, is a string of words that don’t stand up.

Minimum viable product, will need an iterative testing but the deliberate process already in play is ensuring that the product is robust; so, it will be what it is at any point in time. Some point soon when sections are joined it’ll be something very special but that is for testing until we run out of simple ways to break it.

The bar that is the level of bugs found at any given time, will perhaps determine the level of confidence that we can have for using the product for x,y,z purpose.

… but we should be uncompromising in the standards of what we allow to fly… bug hunt all the things!

1 Like

Feel like we’re splitting hairs here guys. The team is doing things in a way that is working and I think it’s more favorable to everyone, maybe that is besides your points but more directly, we all know Maidsafe have strict standards but that isn’t much a matter because in the process of getting to Beta or full release we’re still getting the imperfect releases and quick iterations. So in the journey and the destination, everyone is getting what they want and at the same pace it would happen either way. I think what maybe people are having issue with really is naming. Like why not call Fleming Beta? I wouldn’t agree with that and obviously Maidsafe have this all mapped out and finally agreed upon so no sense in causing more confusion. It’s coming, we’ll get what we get as get it and we should just be happy to help.


Agree. Safe is non partisan, no need for politics. The left / right conflict is just a way the oligarchs separate us from focusing on their centralized power and control. Safe fits into the class conflict category. Safe can unite us in the common goal of decentralized, lateral power and economics sharing. A lot of people will join the Safe network. It may not be a perfect network yet, but it will be soon with our help.


I’d disagree slightly here. Nature DOES code for efficiency but it doesn’t always code for what one might think is efficient. Nature codes for survival first and foremost. Resilience ensures the survival of the species, or in our case the network. I was listening to a TED talk just the other day on how our evolution codes DNA mutations that ensure our greater survival against plagues like malaria and TB but that doesn’t mean it ensures greater health long term, as the flip side is we get genetic disorders as a result. I just means we have a higher chance of not going extinct because we as a species can survive and pass on our genes. Nature does not encode to ensure health or happiness, nature encodes to ensure survival. Nature doesn’t care if you are happy AFTER you reproduce just so long as you do, and it’s very efficient at making sure that you do because if you don’t then your DNA doesn’t get passed on to the next generation most of the time. As I said there’s a difference between what one might THINK is efficient and what Nature actually codes for as BEING efficient.

Many of those errors you speak of are the result of mutation and could in fact save lives in the right context. That’s why we developed sexual reproduction to begin with. So we could all be different and adapt to new situations. Granted we do it rather inefficiently compared to say microbes that reproduce billions of times an hour but still. More of those errors are left over information from previous iterations from our evolutionary journey (or scientists propose so far). Kind of like a version history log. So again not exactly comparable to the errors you’d find in code. Genetic errors are one of those coin flips on survival. On the one hand you wouldn’t be able to survive. On the other you develop dramatic health conditions.

Kind of like choosing to give an entire population an encrypted decentralized internet. There are many who would argue that there are segments of the population that shouldn’t be trusted with such freedom. But on the flipside we’ve seen the damage caused by broken security and trusting any given authority with power to try and manage said demographics. It doesn’t end well. So I’d say whether you’re coding biology or a giant digital network the process isn’t all that different. One can learn a lot from observing nature. Opting to give the entire populace Freedom, Privacy and Security, is kind of like how your DNA opted for genetic resiliance by making the trade off for potential genetic disease. Yes it happens but the species is better off for the choice.


Check out Pëtr Kropotkon’s book “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution”.


2 posts were split to a new topic: DNA and Nature discussion

Thank you for the heavy work team MaidSafe! I add the translation into Bulgarian in the first post :dragon:


what makes anonymity possible? is it parsec or xor?


Neither, these are different tihngs. Parsec is total order + consensus, Xor is addressing scheme.

Anonymity is from a few places, but primarily true decentralised network + data where there is no ability to monitor folk/accounts etc. It goes further, but anonymity starts with us not knowing our users. That step is critical