Since I’m still unsure of how data will be allocated and I worry about the economics of the system, I’d like
to bring up the topic of farming, again, with this idea:
Like originally planned, I think the philosophy of “you get the space you give”, will work perfectly.It creates a general purpose user base, me and the family type usage. It immediately removes the threat of data dumping attacks.
In the second level, I think users should have to pay in safe coin for storage. I don’t think that it a good idea for the network to set a fixed price. Since value is subjective, it may lead to people not using the network and farmers losing out, or farmers may leave based on the returns being too low.
Whereas if the farmers had a way of individually setting prices there would be a constant optimisation, and lowering of costs for users. This would also mean that people would
auto prune “bad” data to save on costs.
So it would be no different than a marketplace, the farmer says he would accept data at a fee of X safe
for X time. I have no idea how this could work but if you look at bitcoin the miner fee has the same effect, the miner decides whether to accept the transaction based on the fee associated with it,
without this fee, you could cripple the network with an overload of transactions.
I think a part of safecoin’s value is that storage space is scarce. If you have no limit on user storage,
the value of safecoin will match that, it will become worthless. If I was told that people who provide water get a token for their service, what good is it to me? The water is free anyway. If I had to use this
token to buy water, then it is a different equation.
Also, I think the biggest danger is playing with core incentives after the system is up and running.
There is talk of maybe we could give some for free, or cap usage at a certain level, or charge a set fee. Whatever is decided, I think playing with it after the fact will cause a loss trust in the
network.