These types of polls where you can view the current voting results have been proven to be useless due to bias.
I feel Maidsafe have been steamrolled, including this in the roadmap and included with zero explanation of how it came to be included and how in fact it would work.
I didn’t participate in any of the discussion…I had no inkling that Maidsafe would actually deviate from the reward structure they offered at crowdsale.
This is only one side of the equation.
There will be a cost, an overhead, on the network to fund this. The money doesn’t come from nowhere. Therefore storage costs must be higher - this is the other side of the equation.
So, will people pay more to PUT data, in the hope they will get more back? Considering how many ways PtP could be gamed, personally I think the odds look poor. I would rather have cheaper PUTs, a simpler network, then choose who to pay for their stuff directly.
I hope people reading this thread are able to separate the sophistry from the fact.
No one is happy there is poverty, except the depraved. Free association does not mean that people should not care about the poor or needy. It is about acknowledging it, but realising that using forced association will not fix it.
Posting about suffering on this thread ignores this. It is an attempt to wrongly define a causal relationship between having freedom and poverty.
Posting about suffering therefore has no logical place in this thread, which makes me extremely sceptical about the motivations of those who choose to post such content. I repeat, no one is suggesting that poverty is good and should be ignored.
@traktion There are too many sides to the question. If Kim Dotcom stepped in behind a fork one things happens, if its an inexperienced little known group versus the MaidSafe team another. The question is impossible to answer through speculation, it is just opinion, belief etc.
@chrisfostertv I don’t remember when PtP was first mentioned, probably after the crowdsale as you say but I’m not sure of that. I am pretty sure that it came straight from David though, and I’ve followed his comments about it in the debate so it is no surprise - in fact he long ago said that he would leave it until the core was working and then add it on and see how it worked, and if necessary take it out again. This seems a sensible way to decide something like this: it is a scientific method, it is how evolution works - test different things and let the results decide rather than speculative opinion (which you seem to agree is not reliable).
As someone who really has no stake in this (yet), I would like to clarify my personal reasons. While I mostly explain the issues I bring in terms of helping the poor, my ultimate agenda is to help everyone. I come here looking for potential in solving a much greater problem - that being the global economy. Stay with me…
Oil and coal are crashing hard today. They could lose 8% of their output due to bankruptcies in 16 months. This could cause the entire global economy to crash. However, renewables are beginning to get their stride (my field) and are set for some game-changers to take off. The net effect is a race between demand for fossils falling and price falling with the caveat that price needs to be high enough to maintain solvency for those still producing fossil fuels at all times. If demand doesn’t fall enough, prices spike and the economy crashes. If demand falls too fast, fossils crash and the economy crashes. It’s a very close tight rope for the next 16-24 years. This is all debatable but not worth it because it is going to go this way. The tide switching toward global warming being serious will only accelerate this but isn’t even a factor yet. It’s only based on supply/demand so far.
The relevant point is that fiat is 20-30% based on the perpetual growth of fossil profits (not total revenue). The only way we got out of the last recession even a little is that the bubble was shifted to unconventional fossil fuel derivatives. That’s failing and it will wipe out the majority of the financial derivatives. That’s 17-22% of GDP and could cause more problems. However, if that balance above is maintained, renewable jobs and “substitution” jobs will carry the productive economy. All this is fine but still not directly relevant to this discussion. Until now.
A crash in the financial sector will take out credit and bonds and savings and may take out the stock market (not kill but devastate for a while). Fortunately, if there is a viable alternative economy for people to migrate to, the fiat system cannot hold the entire economy hostage. They can’t do more bailouts because it will drive people to the cryptos leaving them worse off. They can’t do taxes, or jobs programs or social safety nets or lowing interest/bond rates and they certainly can’t create another bubble (I’m talking to you, retirement plans). Basically, their hand is forced to work in the productive economy or go the way of the dinosaur. Gold is often seen as an alternative but it’s not because it’s under their control as well. Without alternatives like bitcoin (with it’s significant base) or Safecoin (with it’s lowest level market solutions) we could hit major chaos. However, with those alternatives, competition ensures they play at least as fair as the cryptos can offer. And really, it’s only the perception of having this alternative that would ease the problems enough.
With technological unemployment gaining steam, this becomes a double-whammy for driving people away from fiat. And this one isn’t just affecting the poor. It hits white collar just as hard as blue and no-collar. Again, this game will virtually be over by 2030. And the only thing left to maintain any type of money based economy is to have the remaining automation sector pay for the no longer working labor sector. There literally is no other way because automated systems don’t volunteer when programmed to optimize their return.
And yes, its true that a resource based economy of some flavor (there are many) is a potential solution to no longer having a paid work force but the transition still has to begin to work in today’s debt-based economy first.
All in all, I’m suggesting that you guys should really settle the differences and plan for an exodus from fiat to the cryptos, of which I personally hope a significant portion will go to Safecoin/MaidSafe. If that’s only 1%, that’s still huge but if it’s 20% or even 60%, it doesn’t seem that today’s aggregate crypto offerings can even think of how to handle that. The better the digital currencies appear in the eyes of the public, the more attractive they will be seen.
So, do you want to change the world for the better or
I think your right, Maidsafe weren’t steamrolled…David was driving the steamroller 
I thought PtP was an attempt by some to change the rewards structure completly, happy to say I was likely wrong there.
I understood from the start that popular content was to be rewarded if it was wrapped in an app…that was always the plan. So it seems that PtP is just an easier way to implement that without needing to be part of a platform or wrapping in an app.
A change to the farming rate is probably where the confusion lays for me…I did believe that to be set in stone and assumed the popular content reward was allocated as part of the Builder/ App rewards.
David does indicate that the reward split will become more fluid so where it comes from is probably moot anyhow.
At crowdsale it was not called ‘Pay the Producer’ but rewarding popular content was always listed as a feature.
Love this description of PtP.
That’s exactly exactly what I’m arguing for. Exactly as described right there.
A small amount that changes based on various balancing factors, so it doesn’t get in the way of anything else.
#this is powerful because:
Then you start getting rewards for all types of small content that nobody would ever think of donating for. Sure, ppl might donate to a musician they like, but nobody would think to donate to the guy who made a little picture they needed from a google images type of site, or some small data file etc. There’s so many examples of micro content we consume online.
PtP makes all these micro payments happen automatically, so anyone who creates even the smallest little thing that helps people is getting paid for it. Nobody would think to go out of their way to donate for every little file they use on the internet.
PtP actually provides an answer for this. The SafeCoin lottery already happens anyway all the time, might as well set aside a tiny tiny part of that to encourage people to create!!!
Powerful Powerful stuff.
PtP will not work. Mark my words. Maidsafe needs to focus on getting the network out because that is their value added.
PtP requires too much judgement. One person figures out how to game the system it could crash the whole network. Then the credibility of the whole project is ruined.
You’ve honestly come this far with it and don’t believe that this open source project can and will adapt to problems?
You can say the same thing about farming, deduplication, coin transactions, anything. If someone figures out how to game any of those then it will be equally harmful.
But the network will adapt!! That’s how these projects go. BTC, etc.
Same principles for PtP. I’ll show my way out.
No, that is wrong, because with PtP, “Bob’s painting” doesn’t generate any GET traffic, so it won’t receive rewards.
Please understand PtP before trying to criticize
By free association I don’t mean marriage license or visa or banned books or even really trade embargo or trade war. I mean that having people throw money around in less and less considered ways is clearly not the answer. There is something with saying we should have a free market in politicians and laws. I can’t get away with saying I more money therefore I am more important and should be able to risk my greater money for my own gain on buying laws and politicians. If someone tries to stop me or shed light on spending in this regard and then I start screaming about them screwing with my privacy and my free association. I’d be lying and I’d be engaging in bribery. But this is exactly where the rhetoric on freedom of association and freedom of contract go. I want to be able to underpay people in the developing world for labor and resources and I start whining about freedom of contract.
Nixon did something about freedom of association because pot smokers were beating him on Vietnam. So he came up with a rule that said 3 people gathered on a street corner could be disbanded. Bush and Cheny did that with regard to protests. And of course one of Nixon’s enemies was Black people so he criminalized associated self medication and pushed step to introduce and criminalize addiction in the inner cities. The only place he wanted them associating with in for profit prisons- they came a bit later but they hadn’t been gone long as peerage was still in memory. Lennon screwed with freedom of association by saying that people had travel in groups of three so that a consensus could accuse any slip up by a state traitor. So no, Summer of Love style free association is better from my perspective. But freedom for Goldman Sachs to have collusive oligarchic association with Morgan Stanley, that is not ok.
In the capitalists dystopia its not just televangelists its also ads and employers and politicians that sound like this:
Lights, camera, silence on the set
Tape rolling, 3-2-1 action
Welcome to the Church of Suicidal
We’ll have a sermon and a wonderful recital
But before we go on there’s something I must mention
An important message I must bring to your attention
I was in meditation and prayer last night
I was awakened by a shining bright light
Overhead a glorious spirit, he gave me a message and you all need to hear it
"Send me your money, " that’s what he said
He said to “Send me your money”
Now if you can only send a dollar or two
There ain’t a hell of a lot I can promise to you
But if you wants to see heaven’s door
Make out a check for five hundreds or more
“Send me your money”, do you hear what I said?
“Send me your money”
Now give me some bass, um yea that’s how he like it
Now let’s have some silence, for all you sinners
Now give me more bass, yea that was funky
Now take them on home Brother Clark, send me your money
Here comes another con hiding behind a collar
His only God is the almighty dollar
He ain’t no prophet, he ain’t no healer
He’s just a two bit goddamn money stealer
Send me your money
Send it, you got to send it
Send me your money
You hear what I’m saying?
You got to send it, send it
Send me your money
Now how much you give is your own choice
But to me it is the difference between a Porsche and a Rolls Royce
I want you to make it hurt when you dig into your pocket
Cause it makes me feel so good to watch my profits rocket
Send me your money
Now dig in deep, dig real deep into your pocket
I want you to make it hurt!
We’ll take cash, we’ll take checks
We’ll take credit cards, we’ll take jewelry
We’ll take your momma’s dentures if they got gold in them
So whose gonna be the new king of the fakers
Whose gonna take the place of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker?
See my momma, she didn’t raise no fool
Cause you can’t put a price on a miracle
Amen
Easier if you think about it as the game being over, the people who actually own society are cashing in their chips and firing the lazy Paris Hiltons they’ve been putting up with. Of course Paris and her ilk will get by on a substantial universal income feeding off the prior work of others for zero or almost no contribution like they always have. Others will be collecting their inherited retirements. Don’t forget who the real rent seekers have always been. I think they owe us their rents back with interest, maybe a cut to the universal substantial income? The US makes enough to pay everyone from birth to death 50k a year. Leveling out a group of net negative billionaires on their way to becoming trilionaires is a nothing price to pay, there is no price its a pubic service.
In the Coase vs Hoteling models Coase had a parasite model in mind. I think its 40 percent rural cooperatives that will have a much better return but for more urban setting we went with a private investor model for local monopoly utilities. Now I know that there are pension funds caught up in these etc., but think still find it disgusting. I’d like to see the pension funds be the first to divest. I know people worry about chilling investment (I don’t care about that, because I don’t want more speculative investment and its volatility) but collapse is surely more compelling. But I don’t get it. Why can’t just stick it to these petrol cronies with interest and pick winners on this? I mean fossil fuel loses can be taken up by Green gains in employment and investment in a liquid way as we literally cut the cord on political power and harden against various forms of strife.
If gold is controlled, they are making strides with bitcoin on R3 and they’ve long wanted a true global currency beyond reserve status. As for savings being wiped out, I presume you mean by bail-ins in a crash. I wonder if they underestimate how catastrophic this would be. I guess a universal crypto currency and a negative interest rate would help cushion them but its a pretty raw tax on lower income people.
This is from a private PM discussion I’m having about PtP, wanted to share here (posted with permission):
If PtP was fool proof, near impossible to game, with original authors only receiving payment, with the payment being substantial and proportionate to the value of the work, I might even agree. Sadly, none of these things are true.
PtP is a nice idea, but I cannot see how it can be made to work effectively.
If PtP was fool proof, near impossible to game, with original authors only receiving payment, with the payment being substantial and proportionate to the value of the work, I might even agree. Sadly, none of these things are true.
Now substitute “the status quo” for “PtP”.
To receive my support PtP will need to be a worthwhile alternative but not perfect.
n99 is also another imperfect worthwhile alternative at the app level. 
n99because… this is how we consume content on the SAFE Network.
NOBODY IS SAYING THIS. That’s not part of PtP. That’s why it’s called pay the PRODUCER.
The original author won’t ALWAYS be the one getting rewarded. It’s a mechanism that makes people keep working to PRODUCE the best VERSION of everything, so they get more rewards.
This isn’t even a real argument. Nobody is truly arguing against PtP here, because NONE OF YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS. So we can’t even begin to have a real convo here.
Jeez what a waste of time
Austrian economic school is based on the ideas of neo-kantianism and as idiotic as it was.