I can see an increasing need for folk to trade physical goods and services for SAFEcoin ie a way to get into the SAFE system as cash gets scarcer.
The ability for people to access the networks myriad of benefits by liquidating assets and offering services, without touching the world of debt capital or other cryptos.
We cant expect people to set up farming machines and patiently wait for coins to come in, if they have value to add, they should be able to auction this value to those already holding coin in the SAFEsystem or anyone who meets the other side of the required value exchange.
I think we can term this as ‘the double coincidence of wants’
The phrase double coincidence of wants was used in Jevons (1893). “The first difficulty in barter is to find two persons whose disposable possessions mutually suit each other’s wants. There may be many people wanting, and many possessing those things wanted; but to allow of an act of barter there must be a double coincidence, which will rarely happen.” That is, paraphrasing Ostroy and Starr, 1990, p 26, the double coincidence is the situation where the supplier of good A wants good B and the supplier of good B wants good A.
…and what SAFEcoin and an appropriate exchange can help avoid :
The point is that the institution of money gives us a more flexible approach to trade than barter, which has the double coincidence of wants problem. Also known as dual coincidence of wants.
If money wants to be debt, maybe it’s days are over?
Two papers,
I’m thinking the anonymous physical delivery part (2006) could probably be done better natively within SAFE itself
A secure, anonymous exchange for goods and services, including dispute resolution on the SAFE API?
Fairness in Physical Products Delivery Protocol
Conclusion
This paper presented a new e-commerce fair exchange protocol for exchanging physical products and payments between online sellers and buyers.
One strong point of the proposed protocol is that it consists of only seven messages that are exchanged between the parties involved in the protocol. This represents the lowest number of messages of all similar protocols.
Another strong point of the proposed protocol is that it includes the dispute resolution phase that will be implemented in case of disputes between parties. Similar protocols, in the literature consulted, do not discuss a dispute resolution phase; and hence it is unclear how the parties involved will handle disputes.
Future work will include the formally proofing of the fairness property of the proposed protocol using formal methods. It will also include the implementation of the proposed protocol and its integration with an e-commerce application for buying and selling physical products.