So let’s assume that the price of Safecoin is £0.05 on launch. Some press coverage happens, in 12 months it’s featured in the New York times.
Amazon CTO reads it and thinks; hmm I have a load of unused disks and I’ve already paid for the drives that are sitting there empty until someone orders them via Amazon Cloud. My bandwidth costs are fixed and already paid for the year, mostly through peering agreements.
He works out that the electricity cost of the extra CPU cycles to run a vault will be £0.01 per month and he’ll earn £0.05 per month on average. So he get’s an engineer to write a script that deploys all the spare drive space to vaults, so long as the monthly income remains above the cost of the electricity. There’s now loads of storage available on the network so the Safecoin price drops. It actually drops below the cost of the electricity because of fear and the irrationality of markets.
The engineers script detects this and switches off the gazzilion petabits of vault storage. Does this cause network problems?
The Safecoin price rises to encourage farming. The script detects this and switches on the gazzilion petabits of vault storage driving the price down again. So is this the new price for Safecoin? The cost of electricity to Amazon?
Probably some errors in this thought experiment, but it doesn’t seem entirely implausable?