What is Launch? The Language of Roadmap Milestones

We have noticed some confusion around the definition of what we mean by a “launch”, how we use it in the community and internally, and its importance from a legal perspective. Therefore, we want to outline the roadmap and clarify what constitutes “launch” to avoid any potential issues. Let’s get on the same page.

To firm things up, the launch refers to the release of the full public network, particularly the genesis event where the supply of Safe Network Tokens comes into being and can be earned, traded, used, and where MAID can be redeemed. This definition is used in the FINMA paper, and it makes sense for us to stick to it as it is what the community has understood as well.

It is essential that we clearly distinguish test tokens/networks from the official inception of the network where real tokens are created to avoid any legal complications, and confusion for those of you joining in with the community testing.

Therefore, we propose the following roadmap sequence, and definitions:

  1. JoshNet — Alpha Network
  2. Fleming — Alpha Network
  3. Maxwell — Alpha (Feature Complete)
  4. Public Beta
  5. Stable Release — Launch Candidate
  6. Network Launch — Genesis Event

Please note also that 1–5 are considered test networks often referred to as ‘testnets’.

They will come and go, and any tokens utilised on them are for testing and evaluation purposes only. Have fun with them, see how they work, and test them as you see fit. Just remember they are not the real deal.

Likewise, any data uploaded to these test nets, even on the Stable Release, is likely not to persist on to the final Network at launch. So please don’t upload and data you aren’t prepared to lose, nor build anything that depends on it.

Please also be aware that these test networks may evaluated and monitored with analysis, monitoring, and telemetry tools so we can improve them rapidly as we work towards launch. So please factor that in when thinking about your privacy, and what data you add to these networks.

We acknowledge that some terms may have been blurred over the years. However, we believe that if we stick to the proposed terms, things should be easier!

In summary, defining “launch” and providing a clear roadmap is essential to avoid confusion and to keep things a legally ship-shape.


Where is payment-only network in your 1…6 list?


Full roadmap for the Safe Network. A payment only thing would be separate from this. At this point we are on track for everything at once. Then stable network and back to the dream, looking at AI model provisioning, self owning machines, reliable data for the world etc.

I.e. we are back on track for what the Safe network can do as opposed to can we build the Safe network. That latter parts behind us as far as I am concerned now.


Wonderful news and a great relief to many of us, despite the reassurances given a couple of weeks back.


Actually the process as outlined is pretty much agnostic of the feature set; so it could be a really focused Network at first pass that is launched, or something broader, with upgrades then flowing through a beta to stable and then pushed out to the live Network.

The key bit really is the Genesis Event is where the real tokens and the economy will be up and running. The exact feature set for that first release will be established through the beta and to the launch candidate.

Thankfully the decisions on that are now much more at the strategic level (and what will provide the most resilient Network and ecosystem), and the best way to sequence for launch, than they are constrained by the tech.


So, where is the project based on the 1-6 sequence above?

At which point would shareholders be able to see a return on their investment?

1 Like

We are waiting for the JoshNet, expected in a couple of weeks, but depends on implementation and internal testing.


Great update @JimCollinson … wondering though about how a “public beta” in particular doesn’t just keep going with test tokens “pre-genesis” (i.e. conversion of MAID to SNT).

Can you or @dirvine elaborate on this? It’s a bit worrying to me that the network could fork right from the start.

There was some speculation about this sort of thing happening with the payment-only network last month, but I think it would be good if this transition-to-genesis process is clearly spelled out for everyone.


We are required to have a clearly delineated release for the Network Launch, where SNT will come in to existence; given the nod from FINMA. It’s an important step so everyone knows where they stand.

And tokens in networks prior to that are purely for testing purposes, and won’t be carried forward to the Launched Network.

Exactly how the upgrades will happen is another related thing I guess, and how this happens with all the data on a test net etc. I imagine we will see this happening and being tested between Maxwell and Beta and the Launch candidate to prove out the process.

But of course DBCs and SNTs are data on the Network too, so you should assume that it will be a cold start for the Network Launch, with nothing persisting.


From the RFC documenting the process:

Tokens will be paid out to shareholders in three instalments over the period of a year following the launch of the Network.

Any unclaimed shareholder funds will be held by the Foundation for a period of seven years following the inception of the Network, after which these tokens will be transferred to the Network Royalties Pool.

So that’s after the Network Launch Genesis Event.


Sounds fine in theory. But a “public testnet” is public and decentralized, so would be out of the control of Maidsafe to prevent things from persisting (in theory) … which is why I hope this transition will be elaborated upon further when the details are worked out.

Yeah, I get that. But it’s a test network, and will be designated as such. The tokens on this Network will be different from SNT, you won’t be able to swap MAID for them, etc. etc.


I get where this worry comes from and it is good to be aware of it, but I think you and some people here overestimate the risk. Forking the code creates snapshot in time, living project needs not only code but also active developers. If some group keeps the testnet running, it will quickly become obsolete. Even if they had developers, they have two options: go their own way (which is hard), or be always second, copying Safenet updates with a delay.


I’d add to that the data. A fork will not copy the data. Anyone not using the popular network will see their network slowly die as people move over to the “real” network. And as you say the app etc will be developed for the “real” network. Using real for want of a better word.


So MAID which was lent to Maidsafe a few years back will be returned with interest on 6?


I’d expect that it will be sometime after due to logistics. Probably a short time, but sometime after.


Well, not MAID no, but SNT. And yes this will happen after 6 of course.


If this software is anywhere near as revolutionary as we hope, then the effort might be considered by many to be worth the cost/effort/risk. Look at all the stuff that’s happened with the forking of major crypto’s already. We have examples aplenty.

While I would expect Maidsafe’s version to be the popular one, there are no guarantee’s here. Plus we have examples of early forked crypto’s being still active today (if not popular) e.g. ethereum classic.

One reason a fork might be more popular is if they simply fix the token supply and cut out all investors and Maid holders; thus making the platform more decentralized from the start.

Alternatively creating a bridge to the altSNT via an existing popular token like Bitcoin. So just convert your bitcoin to SNT and away you go → The Safe Network becomes the neoBitcoin network.

There is also the threat of some cult-of-personality making the fork and driving adoption e.g. Richard Heart (who has recently forked ethereum and has millions of dollars and a huge cult following).

I’m sure there are ways to mitigate these concerns, I only want to emphasize them to insure that the team is well aware of as many of the potential disruptions here as possible.

In the end there’s nothing anyone can do to stop forking. I am only really concerned right now that it doesn’t happen immediately and before step (6) Network launch.


We here (biggest supporters so far) early seed investors, and Maidsafe who hold a large stake and also have the devs and expertise, wouldn’t back that network up as our tokens wouldn’t be issued probably at all and therefore unavailable to swap. Would likely die out pretty quickly or at best hobble along till it starved to death from lack of data and new nodes, or continued node and data loss.

If for some reason the public release was gatekept by authorities which also seems unlikely, then still the code up to that point could be released and shared by any rogue developer out into the wild, still respecting at least the crowdsale investors. The remaining pool to be mined from supplying resources (and managed by the foundation) would just be larger. As long as code was basically complete, tweaking those numbers would probably be relatively easy at that point.

The biggest issue in that scenario is having to trust the code doesn’t have something sneaky so would need an audit early on.

FWIW, I don’t think any of that happens and that Maidsafe have paved the path ahead well enough where there aren’t likely to be many bumps in the road. Being as off the radar as we have been and highly underestimated has its benefits when there is so much else to be distracted by.


thanks. I guess i knew that already but wanted to mention it to make sure nobody had forgotten about these loaned coins :slight_smile: