I think this may more fall under the Maidsafe Foundation funding for Pods, as it’s software, or be another project to apply for funding on (A) for. I envisage that the initial (A) fund would be to provide the infra-structure (website etc) which provides a way for investors/inventors etc to pitch their projects for community funding etc…a kind of community hub with forums for each individual Project.
This way the Foundation or any other entity is not getting bombarded with loads of ideas of various degrees of merit. If ideas are perceived by others as worth investing in, then they will be more likely to get invested in if (A) sticks to providing the basic “bringing together” of a number ideas…
There isn’t really. I can open 100 accounts and from each buy the maximum amount that allows each account to remain in the “minor investors” group. There are just tradeoffs.
I think if you go for a community organization it’s (unfortunately) best that participants need to use some sort of ID (maybe not necessarily a gov’t issued one, but something like Namecoin or other (there’s a few projects, some of which are OSS, and most are free). That screws things up as anonimity is gone, but then you don’t have to deal with various conspiracy theories and people complaining who may or may not be behind certain votes and so on.
If I understand this correctly, that would be seen as risky because it’d mean you can’t sell your stuff to anyone you please (such as a person who opened a random “universal” wallet). Also I don’t think that MaidSafe would build such wallets (it’s technically challenging and wouldn’t be popular because of what I said above and other reasons (such as privacy, tainted wallets, etc.).
I don’t want to turn this into a discussion about governance or tokens, it’s counterproductive because governance is something that should probably be discussed later… I just wanted to highlight that it can be more complex than it seems.
Yes, the wallet idea was rubbish, I recognise it is complex,just seeing if any solutions, The Namecoin thing, might also just create a similar problem to creating multiple wallets maybe. Maybe some degree of trust among a smaller group could seed things.
Prob the 1st thing we’d have to figure out is how long it would take to create the website/Hub, how much its likely to cost, who can do shit, what will it need etc.
A Ball park figure would be great, because I have absolutely no idea whatsoever - could you make a guess?
In my book your old, starting @ 200, your just 1/4 of the way youngster.
To be honest I don’t see the logic of having 1 million different coins. The reason why people create coins for apps (example Gems) is because this gives back value to the users and fuels the economy of that app. Things are different on the SAFE Network, your apps simply gets rewarded for “get requests”.
The funny thing is, there are more than 500 currencies on coinmarketcap.com, the laughable part is that most of these can’t even be send or exchanged with each other directly. I don’t easily change my mind about things, but I just don’t see the value anymore of creating their own coins to power an app. Especially not on the SAFE Network.
How to manage and control funds? That is really the easy part, with something like Copay.io you can create a multisig wallet. Although I say it’s easy, I know that there is a limit to the amount of Copayers, so that’s a problem. BTW I can’t guarantee/say if Copay is superstable @ the moment.
This is a great article when you think about getting your app developed. I hope I’m wrong with this, but maybe the first year, app Devs won’t even be willing to accept SAFEcoin payments for devoloping stuff. If there are devs here who are willing to accept SAFEcoin, please let us/me know.
1 Like
Doesn’t sound like an endorsement!
The issue is responsibility must be delegated because the more people participate in a massive multisig transaction, the less likely it is that anything will get done. Once delegation is done, then reporting, auditing, etc. comes in.
It’s not anything new, but it’s a real, bureaucratic workload.
1 Like
I’m not thinking either of things would apply really. The coins would just be representing an “interest” in a Project - more like a share. It wouldn’t really be powering “apps” either, as apps would be more the Maidsafe Foundation’s remit.
Also if the coins exist for trade only within the a "Safe-share Nursery"kind of environment with a dedicated mini Community exchange until they were “Grown-Up” enough to survive on the Safex.All trade/funding will use Safe-coin, so drive the eco-system.
The sorting of trust issue will only apply to the small group of maybe 100 investors - aft we need is a way for these initial funds to be managed. All further projects will be easy and go through the (A) website. We would be fine then.
Will read article.
Edit:
The only app that would be created/funded would be the initial website. The Safe apps can interact with both Maidsafe and the Community funded website. Each would follow different models for funding different sorts of “things”, apps are Maidsafe and “goods/Products/Coops etc” are Community. The Community website could even be a side project of the Maidsafe Foundation as a “Community Pod”- maybe this way we could offer to share/pool resources or collaborate somehow? Maidsafe have a share in the community funded Pod. One idea could be to send Msafe to the burn address early and shares issued?..top of my head……gotta trust someone and it would seal a trust for future collaboration.