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
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 
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 )and Storj went for (well I never got past the 100% secure web site message) Token (And farmer ). 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 
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 ) 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
With fiat for a long time its been all grants at the top, rent seeking at the bottom and no one really owns anything. As for owning we tend to hold it only for the period we have a physical body or as long as the stuff avoids physically degrading to the point of no value or being used up. Soveriegn theories alienated land before even fiat took things further.
1 Like
Thanks to Jim Collinson for explaining. “Token” feels so much better. It seems to put things back into context. Seems safer too. Seems like pure clarity. Thank you!
6 Likes
How about Safe Network Tokens = Snokens? Symbol: 
(snow kin)
And snow kin lives in a snow den…
Regarding the WEF article:
It’s a vision, not a plan, and even the author is quite open about some of its fallacies: While most people (unfortunately) don’t care about the privacy of their information, they care a lot about the privacy of their “home zones”. I lived in shared homes long enough to know the pros and cons – even if you want to share as much as possible, it’s never easy, because your needs and standards (e.g. of cleanliness) never really match. I know few people who are mature enough (in lack of a better term) to really make it work. And there’s the problem of not caring about stuff that’s not yours. It seems to work with e.g. car sharing, if you employ or contract personnel to keep cars clean and working, but that’s additional effort.
But beside the mindset of sharing, the author describes a technologically advanced gated community, that still depends on outside resources and probably slave labour, e.g. for the necessary rare earths and metal resources. They just don’t talk about it.
I really don’t believe it’s possible to raise the whole population to “our” standards – even if we would manage on the human level, it will still exploit nature. (I’m painfully aware that I, sitting comfortably and well-feed in a heated room in front of my computer, am exploiting nature and other human beings, even if I try to live quite eco-friendly.)
That might sound pessimistic, but I don’t think we (as whole of humanity) can survive as equals if we don’t sacrifice our comfort… (I’m getting OT again, but ideas in this forum often get me in an existential mood.)
2 Likes
It’s a nice thought, but I think it’s just a fantasy. The Safe Network, just like any economy, will be an open system whether we like it or not, it’s all just a matter of degree.
We can’t stop bridges to monetary systems, simply because it’s a Network used by humans, who will mediate between those systems as soon as data is added.
So even if you blow up the direct fiat > token bridge, you’ll still have people running businesses on the Network, leveraging the value of data on the Network to help pay their bills, or just transferring value from legacy systems like the web, to the network by virtue of its accessibility.
7 Likes
You are lucky - they often get me in a foul mood
Many of us intend to do just as Jim has described above. Some will prosper simply because of the prior knowledge gained in this forum when the network comes to life and the first commercial adopter begin to use it. Its why I need to stick in and thoroughly understand the kind of things @happybeing is pushing the envelope on - SOLID, github etc
Until a utopian revolution in human society, that just the way its going to be.
3 Likes
