Is a Proof of Resource token needed?

Continuing the discussion from The Economics of safecoin:

I understand the the Maidsafe team has made provision for such a token if required, though from what I recall it’s a “last resort” provision. I don’t know how doable implementing a POR token is, but economically I think we should have a good discussion of it. I’m thinking it may be a really important thing for the long-term survival of the SAFE network and the full value and usefulness of safecoin.

The way POR (Proof of Resource) system works.

  1. You start your vault with “0” POR tokens.
  2. When the Network PUTS data into your vault you get credit for the space it uses. Example: 50Mb data stored = 50 tokens added to your wallet.
  3. Now you can spend your tokens by storing your own data or sell them to another user. Example: you decide to upload a 10Mb file. So your balance is now (50 - 10 = 40) POR tokens.
  4. You can also sell 30 tokens to another user. The balance is now (40 - 30 = 10) POR tokens.

Funny Question,
You can’t gain any tokens until someone stores data on the Network. But if they start out the same way, how will they store any data when they are also waiting for tokens? This is a non-starter.

The FREE amount solves the non-starter, but causes a different problem.

Free User_1 stores (5Gb Free) with Farmer_1
Farmer_1 stores (5Gb Free + 5Gb POR tokens) with Farmer_2
Farmer_2 stores (5Gb Free + 10Gb POR tokens) with Farmer_3
Farmer_3 stores (5Gb Free + 15Gb POR tokens) with Farmer_4

Every new account adds +5Gb of storage beyond the total storage space available in the POR system. The solution is to let a farmer start with a negative balance and then provide storage space to acquire credits in order to pay for that balance. If they don’t pay for that balance in X days, their data will be deleted. Once the Network is running after a few days, farmers should be able to setup a vault and earn storage credit before storing their own data.

Farmer_1 stores 10Gb with Farmer _2
F1 = -10Gb and F2 = +10Gb

Farmer_2 stores 10Gb with Farmer _1
F2 = 0Gb and F1 = 0Gb

Now we have balance, but there is no storage for FREE accounts other than donations. This is a barrier for mass adoption.

In order to solve the POR maintenance issue, I was thinking about rewarding tokens with PUT requests and safecoin with GET requests. If a vault deletes data to gain more tokens, they end up destroying their own safecoin farm potential. The Maid Managers would only need to update the storage balance when a user uploads data. I’m not even sure if this helps or not.

That’s some things to wrap my wits around.

I’ll have to leave it to someone else to analyse your breakdown here as we’re over my head on the technical side of this. As a disclaimer, my computer savyness is pretty marginal on the nuts and bolts level. I’ve listened avidly to @dirvine in all available interviews and articles, and followed the forums as closely as my technical understandings allow me to grok.

I’m looking from a different level at the economics of the system. I may be out of my league, but it seems that the creation of safecoin will taper to nothing in time and take its own value curve. It will gain a life of its own, independent of simply maintaining the SAFE network, or it won’t be truly useful as a currency. Or perhaps its value as a currency will create a disincentive which could harm the network.

If we’re to project the network thriving beyond the time that safecoins are created at a notable rate, it seems to me that some provision/reward for continual maintainence and expansion of the network is really in order, so that the network can continue in perpetuity–more or less :smiley: )

I like the put=POR/get=safecoin idea, except that it doesn’t allow for safecoin to leave the equation over time as a one-to-one value tie to network maintanence.

Honestly, I don’t know if what I’m bringing forward is useful to the discussion, from a technical angle, but I’m SO interested in the success of the project that I’ll continue to give my perspective unless asked to butt out.

I’ve been over my own head since this project started. It took me several hours to coherently write down my thoughts on the post you just read. David Irvine said this is the least of our issues. It can be tweaked later. Though I would rather solve it now, before the Network launches.

I feel like I’m stumbling along, trying to solve what may or may not be an issue. It’s very exhausting. But that’s how I roll. :wink:

1 Like

It’s easy to be enthusiastic about this, isn’t it. If I were qualified I’d be knee deep in code.

1 Like

@dirvine David Irvine said this is the least of our issues. It can be tweaked later. Though I would rather solve it now, before the Network launches.

So what are the priority issues for folks outside the MaidSafe team?

I suppose that would be up to the individual.

This is just a brainstorm.

I was thinking about the relationship between farmers and consumers. A farmer grows corn and brings it to a market reseller, usually a grocery store. Then a consumer comes along and buys the corn with an external currency, dollars, euro, etc.

The issue we are having right now is a closed system that is attempting to create a new currency, safecoin. But, if there is very little safecoin in existence, then consumers are limited in buying storage from the farmers. If they are limited to buying storage, how will the farmers get more data to farm for more safecoin? Similar situation as the POR, it’s a non-starter.

We want this economic relationship below.

  • Consumers buy POR tokens from farmers, THEN use those tokens to pay for storage on the SAFE Network.
  • Farmers acquire POR tokens from the Network and sell it to consumers for external currency.

How do we make it work?
I’ve spent several hours trying to make a model that will work in practice. Every mental simulation I ran has the same problem. When a farmer sells corn to a reseller, they cannot take it back. The farmer who sells storage can. And often times, they will go offline, have a power outage, ISP drops, etc.

The only way I see this working is by pure resource donation with the hope that our community uses less than they contribute. In 10 years, there will be no more safecoin to farm. If we make it to 10 years, then maybe people will just contribute resources to use the Network. Most of the profit-driven farmers will reallocate their resource to a more profitable venture.

We can build a responsible community. One that understand our Network resource is limited and knows if we overload it, we all lose. So the upload limit is determined by the individual who cares about the Network and wants to see it survive. This means we NEED “Health Indicators” that @benjaminbollen was talking about. Something like the NR (Network Reserve) that tells us how much storage space is available and if we are getting close to maxing it out.