Right. I knew that. What I didn’t know is that Safecoins would be distributed for work that nobody else wants to pay for.
I think that is a very bad idea, but we’ll see.
The problem - I believe (and I may be wrong) - is that it stands to become devalued by what reminds me of the Fed’s policies today. Tokens should be created and given for useful work (and that means serving of the chunks for which one wants to pay), not just for any traffic.
That sounds familiar:
“If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with bank-notes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coal-mines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is.”
The GET-ters are takers, they don’t produce anything and it’s a problem when people get paid by newly created tokens for providing services to other people who don’t produce any useful economic activity in return.
I see your logic. The problem is bootstrap. Apart from those with foresight, means and vision who invested in the crowdsale, who is going to pay to bootstrap the network?
All those who come after will pay when there is value there, but the network pays early farmers for their contribution to gettin the network up and running. If we follow your logic, we aren’t going to get the same growth, and if the network flops neither crowdfunders or early farmers benefit.
I’m very open minded to a better distribution system. But as @happybeing stated, the problem is bootstrap during the growth stage. Making a self-sustaining (supply/demand) ecosystem without Network subsidization is important to me.
The purchasing power of any currency is affected by the goods and services it is chasing. Success with mass adoption counteracts Safecoin devaluation.
I think killer APPS + Charity “Gift Codes” + Marketing may be the key to a future.
Does this mean it takes a day’s worth of farming to buy a block of PUT requests and use the network effectively? I’d say that’s a measure of currency value right there. Kind of like saying “Okay how much Safecoin do you need to buy a loaf of bread?” You can assign however many numbers you want to a currency but they don’t mean anything until you try to buy something you want. And a day’s farming is a fair chunk of time so how long does that block of PUT requests last? A single day, a week, a month, a year, how long?
That was a purely speculative example. The point I was trying to make is the user must “wait” a certain time before they can access the Network. TestNet3 will tell us how long it actually takes when we try to farm Testcoin.
You are spot on about the valuation. The purchasing power of any currency is based on what it can buy. The very first thing Safecoin buys by default will be PUT storage on the SAFE Network.
These are great questions for TestNet3. I would also like to know if a farmer can earn enough Safecoin to supplement their income and eventually replace it. If the SAFE Network develops SAFE Phone with our own Independent Mesh Network (Or alternative that breaks away from ISP monopoly), and many other innovations… we could really REALLY create the Internet 2.0.
Really hope so…I dont really concern myself too much about the $ purchasing power of the token…it’s utility factor alone should be awesome and kind of mysterious.
Hopeful that we’ll have a network, where there’s no need to fear. I’m sure fear has been an effective control mechanism for a long time… and to have secure comms, secure data and freedom of expression for everyone…will be fun to observe.
future.