Yeah, didn’t even think of that. I could just run my money in a circle and keep creating accounts. Account A makes Account B. B gets the money who sends it to C. C sends it to D. D back to A. Now I have 4 accounts and have lost nothing.
I’d say require a network fee for creating accounts, but I’m not sure where that money would go, and for what effective use… is the network capable of taking tax? I know this was brought up abstractly, but can it actually do that?
Or, could we just be implementing a proof-of-burn kinda thing? 10 safecoins for the account, 5 are burned.
EDIT: I just realized, none of this matters. What am I talking about? Is there any reason to bother stopping people from making accounts? No one is making money on it, and no one is gaining anything. And I don’t believe this can be used for an attack. Or can there be an attack…? If they can be used to attack, then yeah, stop it.
From what I understood, the plan we are discussing separates the 2 functions: GET and PUT
Create Account (Enables unlimited GET functionality)
Receive Safecoin from donations, and farming
Receive Msg, Email, Etc.
Download from SAFE Network
Cannot Spam the Network
Activate Account (Enables limited PUT functionality)
Send Safecoin
Send Msg, Email, Etc.
Upload to the SAFE Network
Can spam the Network but it costs them Safecoin
It’s similar to being a “guest” on a public forum. You can read/download all the posts. But if you want to post or upload content, you have to register and get X amount of post allowance.
In my mind, activating your account is the same as buying a block of storage for PUT requests.
I think most APPS will have PUT requests in their functionality. If the APPS become popular, there is a strong incentive for people to buy more PUT storage beyond activation.
I hope most people become farmers. The more resources they contribute, the more they can use the Network without paying fiat money. Some farmers will sell Safecoin on the exchanges, or spend Safecoin on products/services in the SAFE Network.
So here’s the BIG question. If people can upload their content for free, would they switch over to the SAFE Network where they have to pay to upload? Charity may play a big role in the outcome of this online migration.
I foresee 2 situations.
A new user creates an account, starts farming. But he/she has to wait 24hrs or more… before they earn enough Safecoin to buy their first block of storage. They may get frustrated and lose interest if there aren’t enough APPS to make it worth the effort.
A new user gets a friend invite with “gift code.” He/she creates an account, redeems the gift code and BAM! They are accessing the Network full speed.
Early adopters will likely be #1 with mass migration being #2. APPS are a key ingredient.
I was specifically referencing lifestuff (or any safe app) potentially contributing its safecoin earnings towards a new user invite pool. If users could be rewarded aka paid back for sending out invites, it would create incentive to invite yourself and become rewarded.
It is easy to implement proof of human. I can make a game that people can play; and if my game app is popular, a person can get the reward the app would have generated. Mostly only humans can play most of the games with a good amount of complexity.
So getting on SAFE Network and then entering a game room would create an instance where people can earn some safecoin by playing the game, since as they play that game the app will earn some coins and the coder could design a way to pass on those coins to the player of the game.
Games a fun, and it will be fun to get safecoins and get initiated during a game
I thought GETs were supposed to reward farmers. Not penalize them.
Seems like if someone had popular chunks on their drive (movies or songs?), they would shut down their vault and start over. No incentive to keep it on if it’s hogging bandwidth.
Am I missing something? This seems backwards to me.
Farmers store the data. When GETs occur on the stored data, the farmer has the opportunity to earn safecoin. So popular GETs might give that vault more opportunity to earn. But if it is very popular, the demand will be fulfilled a lot by opportunististically cached chunks out and about the network, rather than the request reaching the original storage vault.
Keep in mind also, that there are four copies of that chunk, three in other vaults. Also, one or even a few 1 mb chunks of a 1.5 gig movie, won’t put a strain on any one machine, as the movies chunks are spread out over the network where the burden will be bourne by lots and lots of vaults.
GET rewards (Safecoin) are paid by the SAFE Network, not the end-user. But the end-user does “initiate” the GET request.
APP rewards (Safecoin) are paid by the SAFE Network, not the end-user. But the end-user does “initiate” the APP usage.
If the SAFE Network is paying for it, where does all the Safecoin come from? We plan to distribute 4.3 Billion Safecoins within 20 years.
Once all the Safecoins have been distributed, we “could” replace the distribution model above with a different one. Perhaps one that charges end-users for their GET usage instead of PUT storage. I’ve posted alternative replacement models on this forum. We have a good amount of time to figure out a viable replacement, if necessary.
Another part is the recycling mechanism for PUT storage. When end-users buy a block of storage for PUT requests, those Safecoin(s) are recycled back into the pool of farmable coins. This slows down the distribution rate. Theoretically, it could stretch distribution time well over 20 years.
Nothing is set in stone and there are no official figures yet. This is just the best or our knowledge, based on many discussions on this forum.
Your description makes complete sense. I thought that was the plan since March…lol.
I am however confused about what David posted.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding what “unlimited GET functionality” means. Are there limitations in place that I’m missing? At first glance it looks as if you can create an account for next to nothing and get unlimited free downloads.
I just couldn’t get my head around the idea of giving away a limited resource, and making it ‘unlimited’. Truth be told, I’m prob still gonna have to stew on it for a few days.
Any worries that a big company will download a ton of files over and over and dilute the safecoin mktcap? I’m guessing perhaps you could control the flow of safecoins, but that still won’t address high bandwidth use if the network gets used a lot.
I’m sure you guys thought about this a lot. Curious about any potential attack vectors/abuse…
Yes, attack vectors have been a major part of evolving to what we seem to be going with, as described well by @dyamanaka. Storing data on the network is what costs safecoin, whether earned by already having contributed to the network, or by purchasing or having them donated to you. So, yes, someone could put in a lot of bandwidth, cpu and storage to earn safecoin, or buy it or have it donated by someone who contributed, in order to purchase the ability to store a flood of junk on the network that stays forever, but it’ll cost them (prohibitively, hopefully).
For discussions of various considered attack vectors just search the threads for same and you should find lots of reading.
Welcome to the club. I spent better part of August fighting these battles…
Okay, maybe there’s a better term, but they can’t “earn” it when nobody pays for it.
Admittedly, those safecoins can be created out of nowhere which effectively “pays” for itself by diluting existing holders of Safecoin.
That’s correct, but that still doesn’t that the cost element away - the unfortunate farmer wannabes end up with their farms full of weed disguised as corn which can’t be detected and killed by any known herbicide.
That’s how safecoin are brought into being and thus distributed broadly, in exchange for providing resource to the network. The network pays. The farmer provides value in exchange. What’s the problem?
This won’t concentrate on any particular farmer or farmers. So if it is a situation it will be a system-wide problem. It’s basically an attack vector, and we’ll see how it plays out., I guess.
They are accessing the Network full speed.
