What’s wrong with greed? Its part of human nature, that’s why we are here on earth and not angels.
Greed is not bad in small communities because it is offset by people’s desire to be part of the community. This means that you do not put your profit before the life of your neighbor.
Unfortunately, outside of small communities, greed leads to the problem of the common good. This means that personal gain is put before other people’s lives.
This is the reason why I say that we need a Foundation that receives part of the inflation and takes care of our common interest. If we rely only on the good will of the people, when another Safe network appears, which gives temporarily more money, this can attract our farmers and kill our network…
2 Likes
Exactly, farmers need to be rewarded for their contribution to the network. If they won’t be rewarded they will go somewhere else. Isn’t it important for the safe network that farmers will improve their hardware over time? If so, what would be the incentive to do so?
The MaidSafe Foundation has that role at the moment AFAIK, what aspects of that do you think need improving?
2 Likes
@happybeing this!
That’s too subtle or under specified for me! The MaidSafe Foundation receives income from there network already, so maybe you want the basis for that to be changed?
2 Likes
I don’t think that’s true. Maybe you mean that it receives donations? Which is not the same as receiving part of the inflation, ie. part of the newly generated Safecoins.
That is the official distribution of Safecoin:
Safecoin will be distributed on an ongoing basis: (1) Pay Vaults for providing service (85% of rewards); (2) Pay developers who produce apps that people use (10% of rewards); (3) Pay the maintainers of the Network code (5% of rewards)
I propose to distribute 5-10% of the inflation to the Foundation. This money can be used in 3 main ways:
- Storage to donate to valuable projects such as Wikipedia, the Internet Archive, etc.
- Marketing to attract new people
- Boost / Additional payment to farmers if needed - for example an attack from another safe network
EDIT: I had forgotten that the foundation owns 50% of the company’s shares. This means that it will potentially receive a maximum of 2.5% of the Dev fee while the company is operating. This is not good enough. Companies are opened and closed. New shares can be printed and the percentage dropped. The better option, in my opinion, is for a Foundation, this one or new one, to receive directly part of the inflation.
2 Likes
Do you want Bitcoin if there is 10% inflation?
You know 4 billion Safecoins are about to be printed, right?
That is limited number not inflation, right? And it will pritned by POR. Why we need inflation??
There are currently 450 million MAID in circulation, to become 4.5 billion more must be printed, this is meant by inflation. This printing in theory can last as long as you and I are alive. From our point of view it is inflation.
In the crypto world printing new coins is called inflation, I guess you’re confusing it with inflation in the economy. I’m talking about printing new coins = inflation…
Btw Bitcoin has an inflation of about 2% per year at the moment…
No one say “There is inflation in BTC”. This is because the total issuance volume is set at 21 million.
And inflation means there is no total insurance volume, so it will print coins without limitation. Most of POS coins use this rule.
But it is totally different game.
2 Likes
This is not true, there is talk everywhere about the bitcoin inflation. Once every 4 years it is reduced by 50%, so we have charts to monitor it:
1 Like
This. I’m voting no. I’d certainly love to have more, but I don’t think it would be good for the network at launch - excess liquidity would be a problem too.
Nothing wrong with greed, but what’s the benefit for the network? Greed is good because it brought capital to the project, but this wouldn’t add anything - hence no balance.
It sucks that it took so long for us to get here - no blame as nobody knew how tough it would be, but this is the risk that investors take when they go in on a project like this and that is why the reward is so high - and it will be, which is why at $0.10 cents, it’s still a huge bargain to buy more now. $100 could turn into $10,000 quite easily in my estimation … so at this stage, asking for extra for the long wait when we are just about there is lacking balance.
3 Likes
My point is not words.
My point is “Do not increase total insurance number” and “Do not print coins without real usability”
4 Likes
You confuse the concepts of finite inflation and infinite inflation. In theory, Bitcoin has finite inflation. In fact, miners may decide to keep printing, and neither you nor I can do anything.
I saying part of the finite inflation should be given directly to a Foundation. I’m not talking about infinite inflation…
1 Like
Btc miners can only decide to keep printing more btc if there is a change in the code.
IMHO is would most likely lead to a fork, as btc 21m cap is what gives btc its value.
1 Like
What gives value to cryptocurrencies is people’s belief that if they hold, they will be able to sell at a higher price. 
This belief may be affected by what you say if after 100 years they decide not to stop printing Bitcoin, but it may not be affected. We will not be alive to see it 
Indeef, all speculation.
In my mind once that cap was removed though, the coin would be dumped hard and never recover.
1 Like
Not required at all. People are suffering from fiat money right now, aren’t they? But they don’t sell them right away to buy gold and pay with it? A world currency that comes from Bitcoin and has infinite inflation is possible…