App "Builders" don't get paid once their App gets "cached?"

I saw this discussed somewhere and it made me a little worried for apps as a whole.

The reason was because “cached” apps don’t require “GETs” or something.

Is this true? So really popular apps won’t have any rewards for the person who made it? That sounds pretty bad!

This is again down to XOR, yes cache will kick in fast on that route (closer to destination route becomes more unique, i.,e a single cache hit), but there are separate individual routes to a chunk. Each of these will cache for 10 mins (current) but the app needs to be super popular to hit a cache and then only for 10 mins or so (also based on number of cache hits per route). So popular apps will get paid a lot and cache hit a lot too. So now imagine several popular apps, they all get the same chance and maybe by almost constantly cached and then this not so much used app, it all converges nicely, perhaps.


All of these are payed Lottery style right? You are not paid per GET per say, the rewards are randomly distributed and the GETS are the number lottery tickets you own?

I would much rather have a faster network than one that paid well… Because if it is slow it won’t pay at all.


Sorry! It might have been answered before, don’t mean to poke the same questions over and over if so! But thank you for bearing with me :slight_smile:

Sounds good :slight_smile: wish I understood more solidly but I’ll just look up some of those words.

If anything, maybe it just helps for equality in general, so that app rewards aren’t completely insane for the top apps :slight_smile: maybe?

1 Like

Definitely sounds like there’s a trade-off, but a positive and important one at that

Yes :smiley: that is the plan, top apps get paid but cannot block out less popular apps who may get more popular given a chance.


If it is lottery style it isn’t much of a trade off at all. If you app is popular enough to be fully cached, you will get the same rewards as any other app that is popular enough to be fully cached… It puts a ceiling on how big of a proportion of the rewards you get, but it really doesn’t limit the amount of the awards…


You hit the nail on the head there, be rewarded but not able to stifle, nice one. I like the decription


Could you break it down a bit further for me please if you have a sec i think I’m about to grasp it but I’m not 100% there yet

Like built in monopoly protection, there is a limit but a single entity or a minority cannot take everything.


So if you build the next facebook on SAFE — You will get paid handsomely, but [not] so handsomely that there isn’t enough left for everybody else.

At least via the network mechanisms – there may be other routes to earn income with your app…


Every day I find new things to get impressed with :smiley: thx guys

…love SAFE Apps!! (see tagpic)


Is there any interest among people to fork SAFE and remove these rewards?

1, There must be a SAFE to fork…

2, No. SAFE without apps will be fairly useless.

3, I do think it is a bad idea to pay other content creators

1 Like

If enough people run the fork, then it will supersede the main branch and absorb all the apps.

What is the harm in rewarding app creators in your mind?

These rules seem fairly arbitrary, like caching. And easily gamed. That’s discussed in a few other recent threads. I guess for this thread, we should limit it discussion of caching rules.

I don’t think they are arbitrary. You personas in the network that have the job of watching the files. If you had more personas to watch the caches you would get the point where you are spending more computing power watching the network than you would have running the network.

The numbers probably could be fine tuned and adjusted, but it is pretty hard to test any of that until you have a functioning network and a functioning currency.

Seems odd to me that people would get all worked up over something that isn’t written yet.


Doesn’t it seem arbitrary that rewards go to file uploaders when there’s a GET for their non-cached content? So the game is generate cache misses?

No, not really, it makes a lot of sense. (I include the devs of APPS in this)

If this is worth anyones while attempting this then figures are needed. Bit hard until the network is at least testable, but please, honestly please game the test system so that this issue can be highlighted.

Without people gaming the test system then the issues are not noticed and likely to end up in the release