Safe Network Dev Update - November 12, 2020

So funny. I was going to put 3.0 but then second guessed myself due to lack of self-confidence in the number of history books I’ve read.

2 Likes

Titan … lots of free cooling for Safe Nodes. :wink:

2 Likes

Is there a word for a universal money system that doesn’t exist yet? Dollar, Euro, Franc, Yen, Pound: all national, all highly influential—so what about international? Any form of international fiat that is akin to the connotation of the aforementioned six, that comes up with a new name, would be the most corrupted currency likely. But SN’s ideal(s) would allow a healthy international method, like a form of cybernetic barter.

Funds? Safe Funds? Cybs? Barter? Ter? Tir? Something completely unique based on natural sounding syllables? Maybe it can have a different name depending on your culture. Or, ask all cultures to pitch all possible names/syllables, and then universally agree on the best sounding one(s) (combinations) regardless of origination. This could be a cool nod towards something culturally etc. unique that aligns with everything and has no egoistic stake in the matter. Safe Shares? (I as an individual am limited, so that cultural effort could go a long way.) Ant communication terminology? Lucre?

1 Like

They used Mono for Esperanto as the most universal latin sound, but I guess Monero and XMR have that one sewn up. Think ‘credits’ may be a good remaining term.

Cool, that’s my picture from Nepal :smiley:

5 Likes

We came up with quite a few names for safe network tokens last year in this thread (mostly toward the end of the thread):

https://safenetforum.org/t/the-safecoin-roadmap-the-road-of-thieves/

and also this thread:

https://safenetforum.org/t/rebranding-maidsafe-for-the-mass/

Being in my early 70’s I’ve always been a bit squeamish about the term “vault”. :slight_smile:

4 Likes

Switching the terminology from coins to tokens is extremely counterproductive. It separates the project from the common terminology created with bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. If safecoin is to function as money it would be very ill-advised to not have a monetary term there. Will it be renamed safetoken to keep consistent?

What common technology do you mean here?

(I am a bit biased as I am happy to not follow crowds and don’t see blockchian as a product usable as is beyond simple transactions that are public and last forever)

I believe in being groundbreaking and not by tweaks or renaming variables in code, but pushing many boundaries at once (like Byzantine fault-tolerant CRDT’s, increase trust over time (node age), federated xor network, pushing encryption to be close to one-time pad as possible, provable dynamic membership group consensus and more, so bit’s of many things all progressed, non just tweaks if you like).

15 Likes

12 posts were split to a new topic: UK taxes and the good folks who pay them

Terminology, not technology. The language people are used to use. Coins are thousands of years old, virtual coins are as old as bitcoin. Safecoin should really leverage this concept and not try to introduce the term tokens with the desired use of safecoin as money.

Also don’t overlook bitcoin, the lightning network has already achieved nearly unlimited TPS capability with almost no fees. Not public and not stored anywhere except on the individual node facilitating the tx. Safecoin is going to need to compete with this.

1 Like

Ah sorry, too many posts and meetings :wink:

Yes it’s a good point. Many digital coins existed before bitcoin-like Chaum’s digital cash e-money and more. Coins though since Ancient Greece or before are known things, but all of these AFAIK are not utility assets. This is where we differ form a normal coin.

I note filecoin went for coin (and farmers :wink: )and Storj went for (well I never got past the 100% secure web site message) Token (And farmer :wink: ). Sia went for a coin.

I agree, from purely a monetary perspective and it’s valid, but bitcoin will never compete as a data network. Hats off to the folks there with lightening and Shnor and more, really pushing boundaries.

6 Likes

I wish, but no.

A real LN transaction still has high costs due to the need of two standard bitcoin transactions to manage a channel and the fact that the actual number of LN transactions per channel is, in the real world, quite limited.

And I’m not mentioning the routing problems involved in finding a path in an unstructured network.

LN, with its current design, will never work for a universal payment system.

4 Likes

we can hope safe works better and outcompetes it :slight_smile:

3 Likes

sounds like music David!

2 Likes

Can I come? Pretty please?! I could be the linguist, if we meet some friendly aliens we need to talk to. Or maybe the food man, if we meet some tasty ones?

4 Likes

I’d say that ‘tokens’ wont cut it either, token exchange is regarded as barter by government and barter is taxed the exact same way as ‘money’ exchange.

The only way this project can live up to it’s byline, is by being totally isolated from ‘money’.

Put away the thought of big ‘money’ windfalls from early investments and ask yourself the question of, how can this network truly change the world.

You think by having bridges to fiat monetary systems you can keep this thing intact?

How much thought has gone into the vulnerabilities of bridging Safe’s inherent value with the fiat world? I’d say, close to zero…because ‘coin’ was a bolt on to the original concept.

It always had a token as a way to xfer resources. In fact we had a patent that was turned down as you cannot patent tokens or money related things.

Then we headed down a path of a node would get certificates for looking after data and these can be used to store.

So been around the houses there. However as a thought experiment (I know dangerous :wink: ) the other option would be every node is also a farmer, even in tiny ways. Proving they have done some work allows them to use the network resources. It’s quite complex, but posisble that way would allow a network with no money transfer.

However we need nodes stable and on line (at the moment) so power users may do that to keep using the network.

Anyway there is the start of a thought experiment, how to have everyone able to participate and also make sure enough participate enough?

A huge win for us is the work in Authorities and CRDT data types. So data can be held anywhere, even on flash drives etc. and also on the network, when required. This allows great flexability and more tools for us. This allows us a much more secure network, but also the ability to migrate data to even better networks in the future and I feel that last part is very important.

10 Likes

If this becomes default (and I’m understanding correctly), the viability of the network is ensured…work is mandatory, more work = more reward with zero tax unless you convert to fiat, where the scalp meister takes a slice.

I really like this…because it nudges users to offer up resources instead of taking the easy way of injecting fiat…and if that fiat pipe gets terminated…users are maybe more attuned to a standalone value network.

This really is next level stuff, does it get us any closer to dethroning the benevolent dictator?

6 Likes

I certainly hope it does.

5 Likes