Last proposal is, that that is only for Maxwell and MVP and based on test results they will set final reward formula.
1 Like
Hmhmm - okay tbh I don’t know if that’s the case - but I’d wonder then how the new little safecoin then come into existence? - if I get paid for storing and can use that coin to store… Then there is no inflation… And if I get paid more than what I have to pay for storage there might be another attack angle again because I can have a look at the other vaults and as soon as I have 4 (or so) vaults in a section I can store chunks in mutables that are closest (in xor) to my vaults and I get the full reward…
It takes from network as well, reward is 2xStoreCost in the proposal, where half is from network. It’s in the RFC. Am on mobile.
This means fairly rapid depletion, but it is a temporary simple algo for the coming tests.
2 Likes
There was discussion about this here:
with little change formula to FR = 2/(4^FC) * (1/G+F/N)
And here: RFC 57: Safecoin Revised - #292 by TylerAbeoJordan
So it might work, but it looks like with less motivation for farmers to share more bandwidth and if your space is full, you will not receive anything else.
1 Like
The only reasonable action then will be to shut your vault down and restart it again 
Age loss vs. No reward at all (Well - or investing into a larger hdd)
I figured that was just a simple placeholder for the final algo so the first testnet could launch.
1 Like
I think people will be more creative than this.
I could imagine a PtP group setting up, where everyone shares their rarely accessed files with everyone else. Then people trawl through these lists doing GETs randomly, knowing that they are unlikely to be cached as they are coming from dispersed locations. This way, caches are avoided and rewards are paid out.
In short, you don’t need to hit your own rare content, you just need to encourage others to. If everyone in the group does the same, it will treat the network like a piñata.
4 Likes
Isn’t this same behaviour encouraged just by any farming in general? If I farm, it is for my benefit to encourage people to GET random files as much as possible?
1 Like
This is the thing @torss described in the PtP topic.
My response to him:
3 Likes
Yeah, and me and all other SAFENetwork supporters will flood the pool and serve you chunks that you do GETs, on while never doing GETs on your chunks.
That should do wonders at crippling it.
I.e. this will be equally susceptible to attacks and gaming so you need to solve how you should mitigate that 
1 Like
Actually, why should farmers be paid for when someone either stores or retrieves their data? I think they should be paid just for providing the resources, whether someone uses those resources or not. Of course the usage of resources should be measured by some system, so that network doesn’t buy something it doesn’t need. And maybe farming reward should be adjusted by the speed of vault, but I think there is no need to reward the vaults by their actual actions, only the need to reward them for being there for network to use.
Adding a bit:
We could have network wide price for storage space, that adjusts by the network need for space. Then we could have few categories that the vaults are ranked according to their speed. Faster vaults are paid more than slower ones. All the vaults at the same speed category are paid equal, regardless where the GETs actually come from.
The basic point being: every vault should be measured by their performance, but only rewarded by their potential, not by their actions.
2 Likes
We need to make a blockchain based on proof of get to distribute the income => list of get’ed chunks 
1 Like
Would be included in operation costs for protection of the network then. So, no - not only costs. Not doing it would mean losing (if the network suffers, and I gain from it being healthy), i.e. there is a far higher alternative cost in not doing it. Besides, I’m doing less work than you, since I go in to cheat i.e. not do the job, just provide you with addresses to do the job on. You on the other hand do all the work, without getting the reciprocal reward. So it is a tiring game, your fans Vs SAFENetwork fans. Who has most stamina (and you need to do more work than us).
1 Like
It could be rather like the prisoners dilemma too. You don’t want a system which works only if everyone plays by the rules, with those who don’t profiting. It instead ends up with everyone abusing the system.
3 Likes
Yep, so the abusers are parasites on the network and need to understand how to manage the resource as to maximize their profits. And enter next dilemma; tragedy of the commons. They will not care for their common host, but all will suck as much blood as they can, until their host dies and the parasites with it 
3 Likes
How would you count this? You will not see who has made a GET on a chunk in your vault, let alone in someone else’s.
1 Like
You could request proof that each file has been requested, in the shape of a file hash. It woukd suggest at least one GET was made, especially if the file list was personalised.
You could be more clever about it too. The tool could generate bundles of file names, each with a mix of files and a mix of orders. Each of these bundles could have a cumulative hash of previous files in the list, making the sequence important. These bundles would have an overall hash, which could be validated by others (owner or otherwise).
The group could require that participants uploaded these bundle hashes for validation, primarily by rhe owner, but another party if there are discrepancies.
Having a large file list would result in many different unique hashes and they could be recycled regularly.
It wouldn’t stop all abuse, but it would require more effort from the liar to not participate.
2 Likes
Farmers not storing data they should, that is requested will be penalised. so this prevents non storage as the penalty could be no age.
1 Like
I’m talking about verifying that the GETs have actually went made.
Also, you need to have fair size of the pool to be able to have sufficiently many paths for the users to do the requests on as to not be hitting caches.
1 Like
What use do they have for the age if they do not earn?
Is it to give incentive for buying more storage media?
2 Likes