SAFEcoin x Bancor protocol

If you allow tokens to be issued on your platform without staking your token, your token will become Omni. Proof: Omni has a marketcap of $827K, while Tether has a marketcap of $4.3B (let’s not get into it too much that Tether is on Ethereum now). If Omni required it’s token to be staked 50% = 50% with Tether, it’s marketcap would’ve been $2.15B.

Here are some examples where you need to stake a platforms token, before you can issue your token on it.
https://www.bancor.network/ you need BNT to issue tokens on this platform
Uniswap Interface you need ETH to issue tokens on this platform
https://makerdao.com/en/dai you need ETH to issue tokens on this platform

Imho SAFEcoin should have the Bancor protocol baked into it.
https://docs.bancorfoundation.org

SAFEcoin should from the get go work like a Bancor relay

@dirvine
If time is spend to code this into SAFEcoin then it serves as the staking mechanism/conversion engine for SAFE tokens. Please do realize that just like Self Auth, we’ll need a Self Mint and staking SAFE.

Staking on Bancor and Uniswap is simple, you take 50% platform token and 50% of the value of the new token.

Two years ago I gave hints about staking SAFEcoin

Tezos network will only serve as the rails with tx fees, it won’t capture the value in it’s token.

On Bancor 50% of this $1bn would have to be staked in BNT and it will be reflected in it’s price.

Eos does use the Bancor protocol for their staking, even better the devs pay the tx fees of their own tokens. It would be great if this was also the case on the SAFE Network.

Two years ago I thought that most people in this community already knew all of this…

I think that non of us wants SAFEcoin to become Omni, so please code up staking to empower SAFE. Bancor is just smartcontracts at work, no exchanges, just conversion and liquidity providers getting an passive income through fees.

btw I suggested this a few weeks ago to Dug :sweat_smile:

:stuck_out_tongue:

6 Likes

I don’t see equivalence between Safecoin and Omni. I always wondered how Omni would give their coin value, and am surprised they’ve not done more.

I’ve never wondered where Safecoin will get it’s value, so I don’t see this as an argument for what you propose.

2 Likes

Like Omni for PUTs you could create millions of tokens in Decorums app.

Safecoin will get it’s value from traders and probably be as Maidsafecoin. Storing files & registering pubids (¥@₩N)

If you can capture 50% of a value coming onto your platform with staking, I think your doing something fundamentaly different. If Safecoin enable user to convert tokens without the need of an exchange we’re no longer bothered with senseless distractive talks.

2 Likes

Rather than being about Safecoin vs Omni @19eddyjohn75 idea is more relevant to the discussion of what kind of token market exchange do we want to see for Safecoin and related markets. Could it/Should it be baked in? The Bancor protocol is an excellent reference point to start any discussion in this this regard.

Left alone Safecoin will most likely follow the path of Bitcoin/Ethereum etc and be primarily be traded on centralised exchanges. Even exchanges built by private third parties on the Safe Network itself will be “centralised” from the point of view of who controls the order book/matching engine code and their private priorities (fee extraction, exclusion of tokens that don’t submit to KYC/AML etc). That game like search is usually a winner take almost all market so once the network effects are established they are hard to almost impossible to displace.

Edit: Although a good starting point, any Safe Network market solution would have to be better than Bancor and learn from their mistakes.

4 Likes

Most say Uniswap made Bancor obsolete. BNT was just added friction

1 Like

Hi.
I do not wish to hijack your thread , but you did not clear up my concern from the other thread, about how it would not break tether if they spent their $ used as collateral to buy the maid needed for the staking.

Did you have an answer? @19eddyjohn75

Donation for Maidsafe

1 Like

I remember investing in mastercoin, I was new ish to crypto then, thankfully it turned out ok, but I was alot more naive back then.
It soon became apparent to me that the creator did not really worry to much about creating value for all holders, but was happy to use his large bag of mastercoin to turn himself a profit.
At least that was my opinion, could be wrong.

1 Like

This provides a bit of background on Bancor, Uniswap pooled liquidity exchanges.

The monetization models of these pooled liquidity networks stand in stark contrast to each other. While the business models of Kyber and Bancor networks are designed to be rent seeking, the only parties that make money on Uniswap are the liquidity providers.

2 Likes

Ideally, doing smart-contracts on SAFE would be great, but until we have SAFE-compute, it’s not a thing. Even if/when we do have SAFE-compute and smart contracts on SAFE however, there will IMO still be a demand for SAFE network coins on other platforms like Ethereum as they can then be used by other smart-contracts on those platforms.

Naturally, setting up these “wrapped tokens” will allow voluntary staking of SAFE network coins by those who manage these contracts.

4 Likes

Nobody is forcing people to hold huge amounts of SAFE. The deal is pretty simple, issue whatever amount you want, but 50% of that value belongs to the people holding SAFE. You can have 1 SAFE and issue 1M Tether in your SAFE relay, just beware of the conversion rate. :crazy_face:

What if the fed wanted to issue repotoken on the SAFE Network?

How does SAFE defend itself, if this is an attack? Sure financial attacks don’t happen, just like the fed and ecb are not competing with printing. :astonished: and of course prices are decided by supply and demand! Wrong, prices are decided by whoever print/has more currency. When 50% of the value your trying to bring in is staked, at least everybody holding SAFE their value is auto adjusted to the injected currency.

Btw you don’t have to hold a huge amounts of SAFE, because people holding SAFE can become a liquidity provider and earn some passive income through fees that’s generate in your SAFE relay.

You can just have 1 SAFE and x amount of your token in a SAFE relay, if people decide to buy your token this will also adjust your tokens price, what you can’t do is force prices upon people unless you have enough SAFE to have a starting price. ICO’s are also not wired into a liquidity pool (exchange), but with a SAFE Relay your connected and can convert to every other token.

IMHO SAFE relays should pay the tx fees because they already hold SAFE and this will also adjust the price of the SAFE token, but free users from having SAFE just to transact. Ideally a devs should just use their ptp balance to take care of this. You can take this even a step further by just letting users pay for storage/pubids with every SAFE token (they are not really paying with the SAFE token, because this in the background is being converted to SAFE to make a payment).

@maidsafe it would be nice if we had a SAFE faucet, that is specifically for account creation where everybody with SAFE can just donate to new users. (just random thought)

This is why SAFE should integrate the Bancor protocol, because you can convert to SAFE and other tokens without the need for an exchange.

This is more about an economy that is decided by humans vs an automatic adjusting economic engine that doesn’t favor a specific set of humans. To me personally an automated market maker fits perfectly into that jigsaw puzzle. Staking accounts for 50% of the currency being printed to top up the price of SAFE, because it’s just not fair that you print $278 billion out of thin air and give it to specific set of humans. Some of us want to be clueless consumers and think this printing has no effect at all, until banks end up with all stocks and do worst damage. What happens when all cryptocurrencies are bought up? Maidsafecoin is powerless, an amateur traders play thing. Have fun with counting sheeps to fall asleep, but when you wake up you’ll probably have the wolfs of wallstreet in bed with you…

What they want to achieve with the Bancor protocol is that you can convert all cryptocurrencies with eachother, but I totally get it that people prefer thousands of exchanges/kyc/aml/hacks/govs. It would be fun if we just repeat this on the SAFE Network, 10 years down the line we might discover what would have been better, like how we discover decades after what would be a good internet, humanity at it’s finest.

It’s depressing to discuss connecting all the cryptocurrencies.

:stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes

We’ve seen iterations in the cryptospace
1 Bitcoin > fork it and create your own chain
2 Omni/Ethereum > create tokens on the chain
3 Uniswap/Bancor > Creation + conversion of tokens on the chain/cross chain (Ethereum/Eos)
Imagine a world where Ethereum had the foresight to built Uniswap into Ether, that would mean that 2000+ tokens could all be exchanged for each other in one place. ERC20 tokens are now all fragmented across centralized/decentralized exchanges, bringing unneeded friction, fees etc…

Do we repeat? Maidsafe knows how difficult it is to get your token listed, do we want devs and users to experience this all over again? While knowing that there is a solution to all this time wasting.

Uniswap can’t do cross chain conversion, Bancor can thanks to BNT (Ethereum/Eos).

2 Likes

Don’t discount Uniswap method so quickly there is a lot than can be learnt from it and it also requires Ethereum to function, satisfying your “make SafeCoin relevant to the market” requirement.

One problem area to focus on with this method of decentralised exchange is that both Bancor and Uniswap require “arbitrage traders to keep the exchange rates for tokens in check. This makes Uniswap [Bancor] dependent on other exchanges to determine the accurate market exchange rates for exchange contracts.”.

Rather than replacing an open market DEX(s) it would appear Bancor/Uniswap must always be complementary to them, which would make baking in a true DEX a higher priority than Bancor/Uniswap like protocol. Perhaps a third way where melding the best of both is possible…

1 Like

Hey, the blockchains just take only “a ledger” on their network, even they didnt cover JPG files.

But maidsafe network cover “data”. The data means JPG file, movies files, medical data etc…

It is huge different, so forgot blockchain’s rule. :slight_smile: (stacking, smart contract, etc)

P.S And there is perpetual web. Everything is recoreded and traceable so if you want to make some kinds of token on it. Just do it :wink:

2 Likes

I think safecoin is enough. What is the value of decentralized token you want to make ?

it can actually work, someone can built a system in safe network that allows for a coin that would be directly changeable to safecoin so one base coin (safecoin) that is based on actual value (storage) and then the other coins connected to it to have a price based on safe coin.

if you want the fiat money you take your safecoin and trade it for fiat.

but with a coin in the safe network it would be troublesome to have all these connection with all coins.

just coin1 → safecoin → coin2

or for fiat coin1 → safecoin → dollars

1 Like

Yes, I never understood bancor so steered clear.
Thanks to @oetyng for posting it in the other thread.

1 Like

man it would be like tokens like maidsafe token, but created in a system inside safe network and tradable with safecoin.

Did you also check out the response from the Bancor team?

Sidenote: No response from Emin ever since…
Honestly only thing that’s important is working code.

For 150+ projects Bancor is alive, fun fact it will even replace Patreon
https://www.creator.eco/communities/5d78040ca17c222d58509760/token

That’s if creators even got a clue what’s being offered…

One year from now there will probably be 300+ tokens on Bancor, time will tell.

1 Like

Dexter is a decentralized exchange similar to Uniswap

Moonbeam is a decentralized exchange similar to Uniswap

3 Likes