SafeCoin Allocation

Hey everyone! I’ve been away for a bit and am glad to see all the great progress the devs have made. I had some questions about how the initial 30% of safecoin will be allocated on day 1.

10% went to crowdsale participants. Did people buy all 10%? If not, what happened to the remaining?

5% the MaidSafe Foundation holds for investors. Investors have shares in MaidSafe and will be able to swap their shares for the safecoins the Foundation is holding for them. What happens if investors’ shares end up overpricing that 5% or they don’t want the coins and want to keep their shares? What will the Foundation do with the remaining coins?

15% the Foundation holds in a developer pool. 10% for bug fixes and developers of new apps and 5% to the core development team. Does the dev team get their 5% from the Foundation immediately upon launch?

Also, I read that “MaidSafe the company will also generate coins by providing P.O.R when
they seed the network with several hundred nodes during final platform
testing. This seeding stage will be public and others are welcome to
contribute resources.” Do these coins come from the initial 30% or are they new coins from farming? And is “MaidSafe the company” the Foundation?

Thanks for all your help in answering all my questions!

1 Like

On day one

10% from crowdsale
5% reserved for original investors

This 15% will eventually be spent into SAFE for storage purchases. Obviously it could change hands prior to that.

After SAFE is running, and on an ongoing basis

With recycling this is effective an ongoing thing where as long as people pay to put content to the network coin can be given out.

the coin is given out according to

100% of FR to farmers
5% of FR to core-devs
10% of FR to App-devs for the portion of gets their APPs initiate.
10% of FR to content providers for the portion of gets to public content with coin-address

The last content payment may be delayed or changed.

1 Like

Nope, they are separate and distinct. The foundation is a registered charity. You can read up more about the difference with a search on here though. :grin:


Thanks for your explanation. How do these percentages work though since the farming rewards add up to over 100? I read the two links you posted and couldn’t understand it. Thanks for your help

Question you need to ask, what is the 100 representing?

People try to relate the 100 as if it is over unity payments. Whereas the 100 is a relationship to Farming Rate and not anything else.

The real question no one asks then is what FR really in relation to the economics of the network.

To answer your question.

Payments are related to farming rate because farming rate is the “need of the network for more resources”.

So in essence it is upto 125% times the need for resources.

Once you realise that then there is no problems. Just the network asking harder for resources.

Now to answer what should be asked by people

The economics have been dealt with in a couple of topics and one explored the age old trick question that if you keep halving and adding then (1+1/2+1/4+1/8+…) what is the result? It approaches 2

What we really need to be exploring is if payment for uploads will cover paying for “need for resources”

To answer that accurately we would need a crystal ball. But we can look at historical use of data and what data people might store.

  • History shows that the most accessed data is public new data (ie new vids, documents, tweets, facebook messages etc etc. Compare yours & friends usage of the internet, do you look for the old stuff or the new stuff?
  • What will people upload. Well it will be different types
    • backups - private
    • family photos/vids - private with sharing to a select few
    • cat vids - public and random usage - That is new viewed often and old viewed above norm
    • messages, tweets, social media - data gets old and unused very quickly
    • movies/music - ages reasonably quickly
  • How many copies of popular uploads will occur? It is likely the more popular a piece of content is the more people will upload it again, as a message, saving it in their private area, etc
  • As the network grows the duplication of uploads will grow too and these averages will decrease too, meaning that more income occurs with without a corresponding increase in downloads.
  • etc

Basically one can expect a fair portion of private uploads which is viewed rarely (compared to public) Anywhere up to 40% of data will be private.

Then of the public material a lot will be viewed rarely because only a few find it interesting, and some will be popular for a day to a week (news vids, memes etc) and some popular for a month or so

Now comes the crystal ball analysis :slight_smile: It is very possible that over 60-70% of all material uploaded when averaged out will be accessed about 2-3 times, because things like backups are almost never accessed. the other 30% is ranges from average of say 10 to 50 times per upload of items. And remember that dedup only means the extra copies are not stored buy the network still charges for the upload. And caching keeps the number of accesses where farmers/devs/ptd/ptp are paid down a lot, that new release (crowdfunded) movie will most likely be cached for the first week and result in very few reads.

It is very possible that averaged across all uploads the number of farming accesses will be very low. Maybe as low as 2 , maybe 5

So then the question that should be asked is how FR relates to upload cost and not how 125 is greater than 100 since the 125 & 100 related to FR, not the upload income.

So we could view accesses according to above crystal ball analysis or take the halving question and say that all content will be access once in the first period of its life then 1/2 the next period, then 1/4 the next, and so on which results in all content averaging out to being accessed twice as much as the first period. Which would give us about the same average when considering the desirability to download.


As long as 125% of FR (average) after coin attempt algorithm is less than 100% of upload income then all will be fine. The coin issuance “algorithm” slows down issuance as coin is issued and not returned quick enough.

And that most content upload is rarely accessed and thus very little GETS and rewards, so pure income. The rest may be rewarded more than its income, but is covered by caching and rarely accessed content and duplication.

And because as more coin is issued the more people will upload the more chance that duplication of uploads occur.

Its unknown at this time how well the algorithms will work well, but the driving force for the rewards is to encourage storage to increase and encourage use of the network.


Thanks for the explanation really appreciate it!

So farmers get the money people pay them for storage and in addition they mine new safecoin as well?

1 Like

Just to clarify, they can access the “Network pool” that is contributed to by people who pay for storage. They are rewarded on GETs, and the “Network pool” is payed on PUTs. But yes, that pool they do have access to.

1 Like

Thanks for the clarification! In addition the farmers mine new coins via proof of resource? And they access the Network pool?

Proof of resource depends on the GETting of information. If a GET is satisfied by a farmer, they’ve completed the proof of resource, and can therefore at that time initiate a farming attempt - an attempt to claim a reward from the pool.

Keep in mind that all safecoin are available to the Network from day 1. They all can be said to be in the pool. So “new coins” are only coins that the Network can give out that have not left the pool yet.

Maybe another angle might help.

uploaders --> pay network coin --> network recycle coin --> coin available for issuing again

farmers --> a coin attempt at farming rate --> network issues coin

Coins are physical Structured Data (SD) objects when they exist. The address space for these SD objects (coins) is 2^32 (approx 4.3 billion).

Coins can only be issued if the coin at the address specified in the attempt does not exist. Coins either exist at the address (owned by someone) or do not exist.

On day one there will be 15% of the coin existing and owned by people.

recycling of coin involves deleting the SD object (coin) which then allows it to be created again at a later time.

Both the “pool” and new coins are one and the same. There is no difference.

I didn’t realize the pool and new coins are the same. So does that mean farmers will get more coins out of the pool than people pay for storage? Because if it was the same amount then there would never be more than 15% of the coin existing and owned by people (in circulation). It’s interesting though that all coins are available to the network on day 1 and are in the network pool. That’s pretty different from most other coins.

By george, I think he’s got it!

Yes, this is a very valid question, and has been modelled here:

I suggest that with the PUT Incentive Model:

This proposal uses the amount that APPs PUT data onto the network (on behalf of the user) to determine how much they will be rewarded by the network.

Also, PUTting recycles Safecoin. This enables the circulation of the lifeblood of the network and is to be encouraged (see: Free GETs aren’t going to fly)

Assisting the direct economic advanacement of the network should be rewarded. This is a value to the network in both a technological sense, and a common one. Technologically speaking, this will balance out the cost of operating the network. From a more abstract point of view, it increases the ubiquitousness of PUTs, while making sure that APPs are designed to contribute to the collective amount of information that is on the network. This helps to both increase adoption, and disseminate information into the public’s hands.

An APP farming attempt will work the same as would a regular farming ttempt. This ensures that it is not “X% of the PUT cost”.

smacz - Put Incentive Model - github

@neo, I forsee there being a lot of documentation being put on the wiki in the near future. FAQs just aren’t cutting it.

Good question and its partly what the 2nd half of my big post explored in a small way.

Its expected that for the first six months that the data is new, well its been there only up to 6 months. And in the 1st six months even old data will be accessed, (just to see it work).

So it seems reasonable that in the 1st six months farmers will be getting more. But unlikely a huge amount more since people are uploading the data too.

It is likely the payment & reward algorithms will be “tuned” too in the first year or so, so that we don’t see the upload costs being so high that way more coin is paid into the network than rewarded.

Probably a good balance is that we see at least as many coin issuance attempts from rewards as coins paid into the system. Then the coin issuance will balance the rates because as more coin is in the wild the less coin issuance attempts will succeed and thus naturally slow down the coin issued rate.


Wow this is complex! So would accessing data be free or not? I see how free GETs could be bad because of people streaming large amounts of data but at the same time it would really increase adoption. With your PUT Incentive Model are GETs free? Thanks for explaining all this!

Yes, GETs are free. However, contributing to the Network (PUTs) benefits the App by letting it have a “farming” opportunity on PUTs like farmers have a “farming opportunity” with GETs.

1 Like

Ah I see thanks for explaining it all!