Hard coded Purchasing Power

[19eddyjohn75]

• 1nano fixed price for all Network resources and up to 1TB upload
• Please no
• Maybe

• Store Of Value
• No
• Won’t work

@storage_guy

But my main point is that if people are going to debate this it ought to be in a new Topic because we’ve strayed away from ‘Pay once store forever’

The idea is simple, you a on the Network can now choose to pay a fixed price for your resources. The idea is a hardcode that you pay 1 nano for 1 NRS, 1 nano for 1TB and 1 nano for 1Tx etc.

Let’s say MAID goes to $0.01, little for you to be happy about I guess.

What the store of value does for you, is in stead of looking at exchanges and hoping that the price goes up, you can now look at clearnet and blockchain users their spending. They will also be looking at your spending btw…

If somebody buy a DNS on clearnet for $0.01, that’s 0.026519149 MAID from your NRS perpective they will be spending 26519148 more than your 1 nano.
Their $1 transaction fee that they pay to Paypal, that’s 2.65198527600 MAID from your Tx perpective they will be spending 265198527599 more than your 1 nano.

Feel free to debate and if you want too vote, there was a poll in the past, but not with the idea. I’ll leave the pros and cons up to you.

Polls: How much will you spend? How much storage do you need? etc

Howdy folks. Some polls here to gauge the needs. They are all anonymous. Uploads When the SAFE network goes live, how much data do you plan to upload to it? poll How many safecoins are you prepared to spend per Gb for this initial data? poll Will you try to upload your real data in test networks for your farmed testcoin? (so that you don’t have to pay it from your converted MAID when the test network goes live) poll Vaults Will you run vault(s)? poll How much total storage do you ai…

[19eddyjohn75]

I respect you kids now even more

[DavidMc0]

A lot of thought and work has gone into ensuring there’s a functional market for resources on the network.

1 nano for everything effective removes the market and makes nodes work for free.

Can you really not see why it would be a disaster, with nodes being quickly full to the point of uselessness?

Hopefully the poll result will put this to rest for you!

[storage_guy]

Please amend the poll to have the option ‘It won’t work’.

You can’t have 1TB for 1 nano because you can’t make the economics work.

I get that you want it and the reasons are entirely noble. But you can’t have it.

People won’t supply 1TB of storage on their computers for essentially free. They will use that spare capacity to provide storage to Storj, Filecoin or something else where they can get a return.

It literally makes no sense in terms of the amount of data either. A DNS entry will be measured in KB, if that (although there will be a minimum record size of 1MB or thereabouts). But you want it to have the same cost as 1TB of data?

This is a network that stores data. Nothing more. There are lots of services that can be built on that and DNS is one of them. TXs or transfers of value are another. There will be others. But you want storing files to be a special case that means people are allowed to use more - at least a couple of orders of magnitude more - of the network’s resources for storing files they upload than any other use for the same price.

[neo]

@storage_guy

People won’t supply 1TB of storage on their computers for essentially free.

Also the concept also totally ignores the fact that the store cost is not just covering the disk storage. It is covering all the overheads. Just like buying lemons from the supermarket, you are paying for all the overheads to get the product in the store, display it, service you buying it. The lemon on the tree is essentially free if you grow the tree in your yard and mulch it with stuff off your property and the rain waters it. But for you to then take it to a place to sell then costs you petrol to get there, materials to make a stall, costs to take money and store it (leather wallet) book keeping for tax, and so on. Same for the home node operator.

Granted with spare resources those extra costs are close to nothing, they still need to be covered and 1 nano just doesn’t do it unless 1 nano is like a big amount of fiat in value

[19eddyjohn75]

First thank you for having this conversation and the valid points that you make.

@DavidMc0

A lot of thought and work has gone into ensuring there’s a functional market for resources on the network.

If a clueless consumer is questioning your pricetag compare to that of Terabox and your answer is, upload your 1TB the farmers will decide your faith. This is free 0.000000000 this is close to free 0.000000001 and I would totally devalue my SAFE if I pay you 0.000010000. Why would I pay 10000x? Is it because the farmers need to balance their farming costs somehow with their fiat costs? I’m pretty sure it’s that and this to me is playing right into the hands of fiat again.

@DavidMc0

1 nano for everything effective removes the market and makes nodes work for free.

Although Terabox is not competing with the Network, one could also argue that their free 1024GB is more attractive than paying 10000x nano. If your 1TB was idle before, but now it’s making you SAFE you should be happy. @dimitar said it the best :

@Dimitar

Data in the network moves like a slow river, old nodes receive new data and forward old data to new nodes. An eternal never-ending river of data that gets bigger and bigger with each new node.

@DavidMc0

Can you really not see why it would be a disaster, with nodes being quickly full to the point of uselessness?

Please keep in mind I’m not saying every node need to store 1TB (this was never @dirvine’s idea), what I’m saying is you can upload whatever you want, but please also allow to upload up to 1TB.

@storage_guy

You can’t have 1TB for 1 nano because you can’t make the economics work.

I get that you want it and the reasons are entirely noble. But you can’t have it.

@storage_guy

People won’t supply 1TB of storage on their computers for essentially free. They will use that spare capacity to provide storage to Storj, Filecoin or something else where they can get a return.

@storage_guy

It literally makes no sense in terms of the amount of data either. A DNS entry will be measured in KB, if that (although there will be a minimum record size of 1MB or thereabouts). But you want it to have the same cost as 1TB of data?

@neo

Also the concept also totally ignores the fact that the store cost is not just covering the disk storage. It is covering all the overheads.

I get the overhead of 5x or maybe 8x, but I’m paying 10000x maybe in SAFE.

Let’s unpack if the economics of this trully won’t work, because like you say there is a possibility.

@storage_guy

If 1 nano - the current minimum amount - would pay for 1TB we’ll need another 3 powers of 10 behind that so a pico so that people can write just 1MB at a time in a single transaction.

Let’s say that the minimum price of a DNS and Tx on clearnet is $0.01, let’s not mention blockchains because these kids are not aware yet how to compete against legacy (yeah sure the minors need to make currency for mining costs ).

The 0.01 is already a hint what 1 nano would be worth, compare to the legacy costs. With a 1 nano Tx fee you have a billion transactions that you can send with 1 MAID, if internet users know about this, they won’t return to clearnet or blockchains. @ the moment of this writing $ 0.01 is 25757661 nanos. The 1 nano txfee doesn’t look at it if you send 0.01 or a billion, this alone makes it more attractive than legacy payments and blockchain.

With 1 nano 1TB you can basically become a livestreamer and if even one person tipped you 1 nano you would already have your ROI. I think there will be paid likes/subscribe/follow and a lot more.

Now let’s go to

@19eddyjohn75

e=mc²

A 1 nano NRS, could for instance buy me safe://sexy and I could sell this for 1000 MAID.

Little energy of 1 nano gets me little matter of 1 NRS and with little matter I get lots of energy

1000000000000x nano ROI. There isn’t a financial instrument on earth that does this, not even compound interest.

But in all honest e=mc² does exist in our universe, that it might not exist maybe in our digital universe, is because we are a little to worried about minors running node.

Btw for someone to buy safe://sexy from me the need to have MAID or BUY it. With over 200 to 300 million active domains on clearnet, it’s either get your NRS as quick as possible or get e=mc². Let’s not forget not every NRS will cost 1 nano, so it’s MAID on exchanges vs outstanding domains vs sell prices of NRS.

In the real world I sold 1 nano for € 0.10 a few days back, I can sell it even for €100. The store owner that I sold it to won’t be looking at his farming cost (this is his business expenses), he can use whatever he farms and give that as change in stead of giving fiat as change (what is 0.01 change compare to a 1TB or 1 NRS or 1Tx).

Let’s not forget with the store of value proposal every domain or transaction on clearnet or blockchains can be measured in nanos. The hard coded purchasing power is just so that we focus on our own ecosystem, not a Storj or Filecoin or clearnet, their simulation works fundamentally different from ours. They can’t say with absolute certain what a dns,storage or tx cost.

1 nano for 1 NRS, 1 nano for 1TB and 1 nano for 1Tx imhco does sound crystal clear. Merchants want absolute certainty when it comes to costs. From the Network’s perspective they could get that if we really want it, because if you look outside the Network prices on blockchains or clearnet are volatile af.

@aatonnomicc

cost me 8 nanos to upload it

For 6.1 MB upload is this the best we can do?

I believe in a world of abundance and us doing better for humanity than every other simulation out there.

✂️ Time Compression

I had to make a second poll, first one refused to change 5 minute err

[DavidMc0]

@19eddyjohn75

compare to that of Terabox

Terrabox free 1tb only includes

• 200mb of ‘privacy space’ (which leads me to assume they can monetise data around the rest of it somehow
• 4gb max file size
• 50mb max video upload
• Ads
• limited download speeds
• No parallel downloads

It’s not comparable to what Autonomi aims to offer.

But, if you want to compare the 2 closer to like for like, compare the 2tb paid plan, available for $36 per year.

That’s $18 per year per TB, and given Autonomi is permanent, assuming that’s worth at least 5x 1 year to a user, we can say the cost per TB of Terabox is $90.

$90 is currently about 220 eMAID, so you’re suggesting that nodes should be happy to offer storage at one 220 billionth the price Terabox is offering. That is not realistic.

@19eddyjohn75

Is it because the farmers need to balance their farming costs somehow with their fiat costs? I’m pretty sure it’s that and this to me is playing right into the hands of fiat again.

It’s not ‘playing into the hands of fiat’. Fiat is a useful unit of account to describe the value of something relative to other things.

You could measure the costs of node operators’ storage / bandwidth / computer hardware in whatever viable way of measuring value you want; fiat, gold, potatoes, and the conclusion would be the same; it doesn’t make economic sense for node operators to offer resources at a price that is a tiny fraction of the cost of providing those resources.

For the network to grow in-line with demand (which is necessary for its survival), the payment for storage needs to be enough to justify node operators expanding their resource provision at a similar rate to demand growth.

Can you please sell me your house / car / phone for 1 nano?

If not, why not?

[riddim]

The option ‘if this really would be considered I would move on and no longer consider this project more than a pipe dream/vaporware and would ask myself how I could ever fall for it’ could be added too - I would go for it

I’m very glad for you if you are this carefree =) but I guess most of humanity (including me) doesn’t have the luxury of even thinking about providing storage for the system you suggest there

[19eddyjohn75]

Yeah your right 2048 GB for €42.99 per annum is more comparable. On the Network that would be 2 nano with farming overhead excluded, at today’s MAID price he would be paying 123687314785 nano so 123687314783 more compare to me on the Network. Stretch it out for 10 years, same MAID price and he is paying 1236873147850 nano, I paid 2 nano forever.

Your node running costs can be balanced with NRS, if I run a node for 5 years for €6000, whoever wants my safe://sexy NRS is paying me $21 million (#inflation) in MAID. The domain name sexy.com was sold for $13 million in 2023.

The store owner can even raise the price of 1 nano to €1 or €10, give that as change and even allow people to buy products in his store with the nano. That nano doesn’t devalue like fiat.

Node runners even got the opportunity to buy MAID and become an instant billionair. If anything this is the opportunity of a life time.

I’m sorry @DavidMc0 your a absolute legend for your 534 eMAID for 13 Pizzas, but it shows how you think about your eMAID in fiat terms. I sold 1 nano for €0.10, I think even kids will be selling each other 1 nano for €0.01 to €1.00 physical coins. I’ll even take the challenge to buy a pizza for 10 nanos (backed by 10TB or 10NRS or 10Tx). Can you tell me what the free floating SAFE that you have in mind is backed by? storage, but how much? NRS, but how much? Txfees, but how much (do we need to waste time on a layer 2)?

Life should be about choice and testing out ideas. If I can signal on my client I’m paying 1 nano for 1 NRS, 1 nano for 1TB and 1 nano for 1Tx. And you can signal on your node how much you want, for your node operations, we’ll get the answer. We have been running nodes for weeks with 0 nanos to show for it…

I don’t have a house or car, but I can sell you 1 of my 8 phones for 1 nano. As you can understand, I’m not playing the Amazon returns game and you are paying for the cost in fiat for me to send it to you. I’ll send you a brick phone, just to combine the house and phone. Yeah I can put a sticker of a car on it. Cost to send it in Europe is minimum €10 so 28749593911 nanos.

If a store of value is not the atom in your universe, your no different from the 15000 other cryptocurrencies out there. Please wait we got forever storage, who lives forever? Please wait you can farm, yeah I know
Noderunners will one day find out about Cerabyte, so if I sympathize with their forever growing competition

All I care for is that the Network grows and that people finally have something that they can call a store of value again.

[DavidMc0]

@19eddyjohn75

Can you tell me what the free floating SAFE that you have in mind is backed by? storage, but how much?

A market for resources.

@19eddyjohn75

Cost to send it in Europe is minimum €10 so 28749593911 nanos.

Well, I want to pay 1 nano for postage too, and I want a working phone for 1 nano, so 2 nanos for your phone + postage. Deal? Of course you wouldn’t do this, as it wouldn’t be a fair exchange of value.

You expecting node operators to give away storage at way below cost is absurd, as it’s not a fair exchange of value.

I’ll stop here, as if you don’t see why your thinking is flawed now, unfortunately you’re either not willing, or not able to understand.

[19eddyjohn75]

@DavidMc0

Well, I want to pay 1 nano for postage too, and I want a working phone for 1 nano, so 2 nanos for your phone + postage. Deal? Of course you wouldn’t do this, as it wouldn’t be a fair exchange of value.

Sure we can do cash on delivery set it up, deal

@DavidMc0

You expecting node operators to give away storage at way below cost is absurd, as it’s not a fair exchange of value.

Dear node runners happy now
1 nano for 1 NRS, 1 nano for 1MB and 1 nano for 1Tx

@DavidMc0

I’ll stop here, as if you don’t see why your thinking is flawed now, unfortunately you’re either not willing, or not able to understand.

I think this demonstrate our different way of thinking, which is always good
@DavidMc0 spend 534000000000 nano for 13 pizzas (first real world tx)
@19eddyjohn75 sold 1 nano for €0.10 is 284771285 nano (second real world tx)

[DavidMc0]

@19eddyjohn75

I think this demonstrate our different way of thinking, which is always good

Maybe, but I hope those designing the economics of the network see things my way

Anyway, it is always thought provoking and interesting throwing around ideas