Does safe net make blockchain technology obsolete?

[Seneca]

@TungSvard

Is this a built-in feature in SAFE? If public data storage be made immutable in SAFE, who sets up the read/write rules as to when data can be written, by whom, and by what event? I thought it is only the owner of the storage who can grant read/write access and this makes the storage controlled by a single person.

The uploader can leave the owner field empty to make data permanently immutable.

[Seneca]

@anon81773980

I think bitcoin continues to be the leader for the next decade. It’s internet gold. It will stay that way for awhile.

I think all it takes is one crypto-currency surpassing bitcoin’s market cap. Then it loses it’s leadership position and it’s network effect will quickly diminish. In terms of features bitcoin already can’t compete with newer crypto-currencies.

[jreighley]

@anon81773980

I mean, 50gb blockchain to me is ridiculous. If we scale it to 7 billion people, it would be petabytes a month. No thanks. Elite bitcoiners disregard that fact. I know that fiber can fare well. But what about 3rd world countries who can’t afford to have that amount of space? Not only that, everybody would have to upsize their hhd. So the reality here is that this leads to more centralization. Once we reach to that point, I think bitcoin will lose the race, and people shift over to better system.

Few people need to download the full blockchain – You can look up the balances and so forth online… Satoshi’s white-paper addressed blockchain bloat – It can be condensed with Merkle trees. Bitcoin is a technology that will evolve over time… I don’t think you can point to it’s weaknesses at the present moment and say “It will never work” If it doesn’t work, and it has most of the marketshare, it will evolve to work… Flipping form one market leading crytpo to the next to the next is a recipe for disaster as none of them will be able to stay stable enough to overcome volatility and remain a consistent store of value long term. Granted it is still learning how to evolve - but the market will override the egos soon…

Most importantly, If you save the blockchain on SAFE, It only needs to be stored once - and the whole world can access the same copy. I think between that feature and the fact that you could build a bitcoin wallet on SAFE that couldn’t easily be hacked – Bitcoiners will flock to SAFE, and SAFE will be a very good compliment to bitcoin…

I am not terribly excited about SAFEcoin as overpowering and overtaking Bitcoin… If it happens it happens, and that will be fine… But it is way more important that it supports the SAFE network and is stable and predictable enough to pay for SAFEnet to be a reliable infrastructure. Playing nice with Bitcoin will gain us a lot of users… Being a rival – not so much… Let Bitcoin be good at what Bitcoin is good at and let SAFE be good at what SAFE is good at and in the end, things will work out how they should work out.

Scale anything to 7 billion people and you are going to have some massive bloat.

[happybeing]

Smart contracts will be a feature of SAFE, just not immediately, and so you get both on one network.

[anon81773980]

Few people need to download the full blockchain

That’s the problem. That’s centralization. I don’t like only having few people in the network operating entire blockchain, and everybody else is using offchain or some kind of off network payment ledger.

What if the godvernment decided that they will regulate it. Therefore, the godvernment will only operate the full blockchain nodes, and not citizen… Don’t underestimate the lefties. They are willing to go far.

Scale anything to 7 billion people and you are going to have some massive bloat.

Well, look at visa. They’re doing so well. I am sure blockchain can do it better than visa. It is just matter of time.

[Southside]

@anon81773980

Don’t underestimate the lefties. They are willing to go far.

I dont think you understand much about Scots - many of us are VERY proud to be of the left

[jreighley]

@anon81773980

That’s the problem. That’s centralization. I don’t like only having few people in the network operating entire blockchain, and everybody else is using offchain or some kind of off network payment ledger.

Not really… Decentralization does not require excess redundancy. After 6 or so blocks blocks are eternally unalterable and agreed upon by the whole network. It doesn’t matter if I can verify a transaction at 50 sites or a million, so long as they all agree, and barring a few outlying temporary blips, they all will… MaidSAFE will centralize it but decentralize it. The same file can be held by a million different people and it will only take up as much room as one person holding it… That which is agreed upon in mass doesn’t need to be stored redundantly In order to be decentralized… It just needs to be agreed upon in mass… It is decentralization of control and decision making that we are seeking, not excessive redundant overhead.

[Seneca]

@anon81773980

Don’t underestimate the lefties.

@Southside

many of us are VERY proud to be of the left

Left/right is a useless one dimensional classification for something as complex as political preference. Sometimes I wish we all just stopped using it.

@jreighley

It doesn’t matter if I can verify a transaction at 50 sites or a million

If at some point there will be only 50 copies of the full bitcoin block-chain in the world due to it’s ridiculous size, given the stakes involved I expect attempts at coordinated attacks to destroy/disable them all at once. Bitcoin would become DDoS-able well before there are only 50 copies left.

@jreighley

It is decentralization of control and decision making that we are seeking, not excessive redundant overhead.

SAFE does a lot better in that regard.

@jreighley

Playing nice with Bitcoin will gain us a lot of users… Being a rival – not so much.

Of course I agree, we should definitely play nice with Bitcoin. But the market will decide whether SAFE will be a rival or not, and if I compare SAFE and Bitcoin I think the market will make SAFE a rival that will at some point take over Bitcoin’s lead position in crypto-currencies. That doesn’t mean that I dislike Bitcoin, I much prefer it over the fascist Euro for example.

[jreighley]

@Seneca

If at some point there will be only 50 copies of the full bitcoin block-chain in the world due to it’s ridiculous size, given the stakes involved I expect attempts at coordinated attacks to destroy/disable them all at once. Bitcoin would become DDoS-able well before there are only 50 copies left.

Can’t do that to the copy on SAFE… DDoS doesn’t work since the opportunistic caching moves the data right to your machine and you DDoS yourself.

[anon81773980]

You got a point.

maidsafe farmers will tend to be more centralized if it catches on because they’ll make enough money to buy more hardware, and it’ll continue to rack up. So I guess it is okay just as long it is free market. Natural monopolies occurs before somebody else finds a cheaper way to produce it. Centralization is not a big deal just as long it’s voluntary.

Majority of the the statist problems disappears within blockchain/maidsafe network. This leaves the only issue, minority who doesn’t have a say in majority rule. But again, most of the minorities are crackers, and who wants to break the system. Other times, it’s honest men who wants make some changes to the protocol, causing a hardfork. Or does not agree to the majority for the changes to the protocol. Does that mean the minority needs to use different safe network?

[Seneca]

@jreighley

Can’t do that to the copy on SAFE…

I know, and that’s great! But if bitcoin depends on SAFE for it’s security/survival then it’s effectively a SAFE app. That’d say something about the Bitcoin protocol.

[jreighley]

@Seneca

I know, and that’s great! But if bitcoin depends on SAFE for it’s security/survival then it’s effectively a SAFE app. That’d say something about the Bitcoin protocol.

I don’t think a consumer level secure bitcoin wallet is possible without SAFE… That is a good thing -because there is a huge market for a consumer level secure bitcoin wallet… The technologies complement one another and should catapult one another to greater and greater adoption.

[ejinte]

The way I see it; Bitcoin is like a landline when maid is like a cellphone.

[Dave_Scotese]

Can you explain what ASICs have to do with access to the bitcoin network? I have access to it with my laptop which has no Bitcoin ASICs in it.

Certainly, I can’t mine bitcoin (well, I can try, but it’s a waste of electricity), but that doesn’t stop me from having access to the network.

[Dave_Scotese]

Isn’t it possible for a transaction to move safecoin from multiple previous transactions? In that case, which of the multiple input transactions would be hashed, and what protects the other one from getting double-spent?

I hope I’m missing something relatively obvious and that you’ll tell me what it is because that will help advance my understanding. Thanks!

[happybeing]

The point is that you can’t mine bitcoin, because it relies on ASICs, so without a bank account its hard to obtain and therefore use bitcoin. Safecoin will be farmable by anyone, so is easy to obtain regardless of access to banking, or specialist tech.

[Traktion]

@Dave_Scotese

Isn’t it possible for a transaction to move safecoin from multiple previous transactions? In that case, which of the multiple input transactions would be hashed, and what protects the other one from getting double-spent?

I hope I’m missing something relatively obvious and that you’ll tell me what it is because that will help advance my understanding. Thanks!

I am not sure what you mean, but we aren’t talking about Safecoin transactions in this context. We are talking about putting some arbitrary data element to the network, then using the hash of that data as a key for the next element. As we only know what the hash will be after it has been saved to the network, we can guarantee it came before the following element.

As saving data to the network is an atomic operation, being handled by the close group of nodes tasked with maintaining that data, double
spends (read: double saves) aren’t possible at the network level. Therefore, we only need to worry about sequencing when forming an unforgable journal.

[nicklambert]

I think @happybeing has summed this up well below. I think it is important for people in developing countries to be able to help themselves. The only way they can enter the bitcoin ecosystem now is by being given bitcoin as opposed to being able to earn it (“give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime”). I think the economics behind safecoin will hopefully enable decentralisation to be maintained and represent an improvement vs the economics of bitcoin.

[Dave_Scotese]

@nicklambert

The only way they can enter the bitcoin ecosystem now is by being given bitcoin as opposed to being able to earn it

I get bitcoin by buying it. I also get bitcoin by earning it, not through mining, but taking care of websites and writing code.

I think what you mean is that it is now impossible for most people to create bitcoin by working to create it. This is true, and an excellent feature. After all, creating any amount of a medium of exchange negatively affects everyone else holding that medium, but when such creation provides some benefit to all holders of a medium of exchange, then it can be justified.

In order to protect that trade-off, the work it takes to create should have a value that floats in the free market according to those who value that work.

[neo]

@nicklambert

I think it is important for people in developing countries to be able to help themselves. The only way they can enter the bitcoin ecosystem now is by being given bitcoin as opposed to being able to earn it

@Dave_Scotese

I get bitcoin by buying it. I also get bitcoin by earning it, not through mining, but taking care of websites and writing code.

You only quoted half the discussion. The “they” is from the previous sentence. The “they” are poor people without the ability to buy bitcoin