SAFE Network in developing countries

Hi All,

I am new to the SAFE Network, I have to say it really excites me. I hope to play an active role (not quite sure how yet). I am wondering how the SAFE Network can be leveraged in developing countries. What kind of apps are likely to have the most visible impact out of the gate.

A recent example is the telecommunications revolution. Twenty years ago, Nigeria had 200,000 phone lines (fixed lines) with a population of over 120 million. Fast forward to today and Nigeria now has over 167 million phone lines with a population of 177 million. All due leapfrogging fixed lines and moving straight to wireless tech.

One of the biggest issues in developing countries low internet penetration. I’m curious if/how SAFE Network will have an effect on this.


To achieve internet penetration SAFE will need to collaborate with various mesh networking protocols (in my ideal world).

A direct implication for the SAFE network that I personally value, is giving everybody equal access to information resources. So regardless of whether you have a cellphone or the latest gaming computer, you’d have access to the same data storage and the same computational abilities (not directly for games though). This is all under the condition that we get the dynamic for safecoin right so that it equally spreads over humanity and does not end up (all) in the pockets of some.


I am developing material and new scripts for the Nigerian scam specifically created for SAFE Network.
There will be an announcement in September.

I think we’ll see a lot of DIY video content first because that’s easiest to produce and if you score jackpot you can get rich and famous.

For developing countries SAFE won’t have much of an impact after its release in the first years. @akhanaton as you put it low internet connectivity is the biggest challenge to this. @dirvine correct me if am wrong but the present implementation of vaults is that they are reset after connection is lost to that node. And for a vault to earn safecoin it would need to be trusted by the network in that it will be available raising its chances of providing the resource when a request is made to the network. With this you find that for developing countries very few vaults would be maintained since they never reach that level of trust to have the network retrieve a resource from them. Hence very low earnings in safecoin. And since using the network requires that i have safecoin you find that only a small number of people would venture into safe fully.

But the first service of the network is not farming rewards; the first service of the network is information and computation on information. That is valuable, that is accessible with a client over a slower connection.


@BenMS This is true. But it will take a while before safe network catches up to what is already in existence and many people are hard coded to use what they are already used to. In terms of information which is public i.e no charge people will be there to use it. However, when it comes to private information or apps which consume safecoins people will be lost. [context: people meaning from developing countries. Exclude well placed(financially) individuals and businesses.]

So farming comes into play since it provides necessary incentive to use safenetwork. Its a pretty nice incentive since anyone out there would jump at the opportunity to earn some extra cash without working for it. It would be hard to find a typical person from a developing country readily exchanging currency for safecoin in order to use the network services. The first choice would be to jump into farming rewards then use the rewards for whatever they want.

Yes, but why not set up a donate-your-safecoins, or a Kiva for safecoins; The network can’t determine what an equitable redistribution is, but safecoin makes the currency ultra moveable, and easier to protect against corruption.

or remittences can be done in safecoin with a good app; if bitcoin is not killing Western Unions legalised 30% extortion fast enough, safecoin can help tighten the noose on such immoral business practices.

1 Like

I disagree. Short text (information) has immense value. Most high bandwidth content is not particularly beneficial for Africa (there are exceptions on individual and country level, but I don’t see a need to spend 3 hours a day watching tons of movies in foreign languages).

Most people primarily need information to get productive. Entertainment and fancy high-res education videos have a poor useful_info/MB ratio.
Compare the usefulness of some fancy “sustainable this or that” video watched by 100 people (100 GB) vs. the current grain prices distributed to 50 million small farmers (5 GB).

1 Like

Would be nice to see this implemented on the safenetwork. To have an app or service that targets the less fortunate and provides them with the network resources/services for free and foots the bill itself. As long as it does go to zero.

@janitor like your angle and the approach of using the implementation of the safenetwork for this use. However, this approach is business/organizational oriented, been so means an individual/organization would cater for the means by which this information reaches the end user.

Sorry, I am not sure what you mean. Are you saying you are considering the problem from another level (e.g. SAFE Network view point - what the community should focus on in the medium to long term)?

if a maximum coins per vault would get into play, the surplus could be distributed to the others, including the less fortunate. so maybe it would not so much matter losing the connectivity.

Was replying in context of a single person interacting with safenetwork and the motivation behind them using safenetwork.

1 Like

@dirvine @BenMS what do you think of this? :point_up_2:

@dirvine can the network provide a compensation reward for vaults which never get a resource pulled out of them?

That would encourage people to have 1000’s of vaults through VMs or however, with little likely hood of getting much because their connection to the net is made slow. Then the ones who provide useful resource to the net will be giving coins to these people gaming the system.

Why do we need to limit vaults from earning what they earn.

Set up an APP that is effectively a charity that gives to these people in poorer countries to help enable them, rather than try and program all sorts of artificial controls that open avenues for attack and gaming the system

Rewards for farming are not going to make people super wealthy, it is designed to rewards them for the resources they put into the system. Basically it costs real money to initially buy those resources and connectively and the system will compensate them for it. Yes some of the rewards is to reward their efforts and willingness to participate too. Why deny someone their rightful reward because YOU feel its evil. Set up an APP to allow people free choice to give or not.

Where people may make money is that they have those resources anyhow. So the rewards can be saved up to replace their PC when needed.

ok, i understand your point, as not to limit anything. and i know you probably already hate my guts or consider me to be a stupid s.o.b.
the overal idea on most people head is this: get many safecoins and cash them for real money. problem is that safecoin lives inside of a network. the safecoin represents the way of exchanging encrypted data inside this network. ok, the GETS are free for the issuer, so one can browse and download for free. the PUT is charged, so one can upload as long as he have safecoins. now i ask you: how many data does one need to upload, per month, to the network? well, you will say it depends. people have various needs. i understand completly, but in this network we are ANTS. we work as one. we have to make the colony evolve, not the individuals. the ants don’t have rich or poor, right? an ant don’t eat very different than another brother in the colony, right?
but let’s try and enumerate the advantages and disadvantages of limiting the safecoin for income and transactions. i’ll do the advantages:
the surplus after the max income per month is distributed among the nodes in the vault’s group, and if they are at maximum, then it goes to the closest group (like an epidemy). setting 1000 VM won’t help because each of the vault will help the other vault in their group once they reach max. also, by having a limit on transactions, one cannot dump the earnings of one address into a master address at a given time. this is good for preventing money laundry. also, this will prevent the safecoins for being held by some few individuals and disrupting the economy (inflation/deflation). this will help the circulation of the safecoin within the network, because the surplus is getting spread. this will help vaults to get a coin even if they don’t get a GET because of various reasons(example: they are held in poorer countries with few hours of internet connectivity, or vaults are held on mobile phones that jump from one wifi to another). this will help creating a balance between vaults (to be read here as ANTS). this will help the coins STAY within the network and ACTUALLY be traded for data WITHIN the network. this represents a real life evolution, when a vault accumulets wealth as time passes by, and not get rich in a day for some hollywood made movie. this will decrement the number of bad actors, in oppose to offering them a chance to get rich quickly by making big transactions through controlled vaults or by offering a proper enviornments for games. this would help stop piracy. this would enforce the purpose of sefecoin.
and i think there are other advantages. but like in any other things on this planet, there are disadvantages. maybe you could try to enumerate them, and after all is set and done we could sum all of this up and make some conclusions

No. But I do think there are gaps (like all of us) in your understanding of how the SAFEcoin works within the network and the potent problems there are if we adopt certain things rather than the way its designed.

Yep, but I get the impression that you feel by cashing out SAFEcoins it will somehow cause problems to the way the SAFE network operates, the way ANTS work together. You have to realise that the SAFE network has no knowledge when someone does this and it does not affect the economy/workings of the network. This is important to realise.

Also the coins NEVER leave the system, anyone who trades the coins is simply transferring the ownership of the coins from themselves to another person/trader’s “wallet”. Coins are only removed when someone spends one for SAFE resources and the system “deletes” the coin.

We are not the ANTS. Very important. The nodes, vaults, client are the ANTS, we provide resources for the ANTS to work with. The ANTS also take our data and store it, they retrieve it, and so on. A part of all this work is that “honey” is produced for both the ANTS to keep working and as a reward for the resources given to the network.

Vaults work on their own they don’t group together. Also read what I said again, the gamer will deliberately make the 1000 or more vaults bandwidth choked and thus will not be rewarded because they are never are quick enough. So your idea means these vaults will be given some of the leftover coins. EASY to game,

SAFE network has no way and the protocol does not want to know which country poor/rich person or any other such details. So anyone can pretend to be that by limiting their vaults to act like your defined “poor” vault. Thus game the system

I won’t discuss the rest of your reasoning, not because it is bad, but rather because of the assumed foundation it relies on. Don’t be discouraged, but I suggest asking more questions on the basics first and get to understand some of the dynamics that were considered when the development team chose the path they chose.

1 Like

yes the vaults are ants, so why an ant of the colony have a 100 x income than any other? we have to think from within the system, not outside.

do you really believe this or you just throw it for fun?

you misunderstood me here

the economy is affected, not directly, but indirectly. and do you know why? because safecoin represents bandwidth and storage. it doesn’t represent apples from grocery store. it is issued to be traded for bandwidth and storage, in the first place, and not for cleaning my house, and buy loaves of bread and trade in again AFTER x amount of time and put in circulation. this is what you don’t get. i’m talking about first hand circulation. quite frankly i consider safecoin to be just the oil. you can’t trade oil for vegetables or for eggs in a shop. safecoin just powers up the network. i don’t know if i’m understood

a currency or currencies are yet to be created. they will have a rate transfer to safecoin. but limiting the safecoin makes it stable and with only the purpose of powering the network. if you limit the safecoin, it will be extremly hard for other currencies to disrupt it. or for other outside of the network things, aswell

why to give a lot of oil to one person? does he need it for day by day activities? of course not. he will trade the oil for vegetables, but with vegetables you don’t power a car. of course the oil once it had arrived to other person is used a little for car, then trade again with other persons. but why not eliminate these middle mans that could disrupt the value of the oil? why the oil should be directed in the places that these moiddlemans want, instead of being directed by the network for every individual that needs oil for the car, as much as the car can consume for a month, strictly? it sounds communismo-socialist but it’s a good way to go for the first layer