What is the logic behind random rewards for gets as opposed to being rewarded for every get?
I think it’s the need to adjust the farming rate and balance supply and demand related to the total issuance, activity of the network, demand for GETs, free space, etc.
If this reward were to be fixed, the network would be rigid and couldn’t adjust.
3 Likes
I understand why the farming rate needs to be adjusted for supply and demand, but what is the purpose of using a lottery system?
The strain on the network would be immense if every GET would be rewarded. Also, SafeCoin isn’t perfectly divisible (yet).
3 Likes
The simple reason is that safecoin is not divisible.
If you rewarded every GET then you have to reward one coin per GET. David has mentioned before that when the coin is divisible then this would be examined with the view to reward every GET.
Basically it might be 10,000 average GETs per safecoin. At the moment it depends on the measured spare storage compared to used storage. When measured spare storage space (TS) is approx equal to used storage space (TP) then Farming rate is very very small and a lot of GETs per coin.
Now if the coin was divisible then even if the farming rate was 100,000 GETs per coin, the farmer would get 0.000001 of a coin per GET. And if 1,000 GETs per coin then the farmer gets 0.0001 of a coin per GET. BUT because the coin is indivisible then the logic is turned around and one has to GET certain number chunks in order to get a coin. (There is some more logic which limits coins rewards when the total coin issued gets higher)
7 Likes
Great explanation … I GET it now 
2 Likes
Wasn’t there also something to do with preventing the NSA from knowing who the big farmers are or something like that?