Most folks storing will be farming. Why not? Your hard drive is 2/3rds empty and your computer is on most all of the time.
Do you think SAFE will be widely adopted if you have to go buy bitcoin, take it to shapeshift.io then direct it to your SAFE account in order to save anything? Not likely. (That causes some tracibility issues in and of itself) People will Farm so they can use the network. Farming will be built in as a default behavior. It isn’t something you need to go build a rig to do. You can if you want, but you will be competing against a billion people who didn’t
Safecoin’s value comes from its ability to buy, sell, and trade goods and services from the SAFE Network. Only Safecoin’s exchange rate for fiat currency is determined by exchange markets. This exchange rate is based on speculation of its ability to buy, sell, and trade goods and services. Do not confuse Safecoin’s value with its exchange rate.
Edit: Safecoin’s value and ability to buy, sell, and trade goods and services from the network will translate to its ability to buy, sell, and trade goods and services in the real world. For example, x Safecoin’s will buy y GBs of storage and z gallons of milk because the values of the resources are similar.
The plan is not to support division unless necessary, and that will at least to an extent depend on how the network develops and what people want to use Safecoin for.
I agree you make what seems am important point, something to remember for the future debate on this.
My example was about a scenario when all safecoins have been generated. So the adjustment of the farming reward is then solely dependent on the amount of recycled safecoins available. This means that in order to be able to increase the farming reward, the cost of storing data must be increased. And more expensive data storage means that less data will be stored. In other words, increasing the storage cost doesn’t automatically result in more ‘income’ because the decreased incentive for storing data (more expensive) leads to people storing less data. And without enough income the network is unable to adjust the farming reward to the required level.
Your confusing value again. A decrease in the storage capacity of the SAFE Network coupled with an increase in the cost to store data increases the value of Safecoin. This is basic supply and demand. This rise in value will increase the incentive to farm.
I was thinking of the value of safecoin as precisely the exchange rate, such as what the cost of 1 safecoin is in U.S. dollars or euros etc. Other forms of values are just subjective opinions, are they not?
I don’t mean to be rude, but you don’t have basic understanding of economics. And you need a basic understaffing of economics to get what everyone is saying.
Edit: I can’t stress enough, I don’t mean to be rude.
It’s value is based on it’s a ability to buy, sell and trade goods and services. Meaning that the more people accept it as a currency the greater its value. Safecoin is the same way, but it also has added value because of its built in ability to buy, sell, and trade SAFE Network resources.
Let me ask you this question. What gives fiat money value?
I agree with that. And yet a coin without division cannot serve as a general purpose currency. However this thread is about a “Safecoin Economy”, merits of deflation and inflation in such an economy. Can you have an economy without a currency? It appears most people assume Safecoin will be a currency and not just a resource allocation token to serve the network as the white paper and developer comments suggest. This also impacts its final valuation enormously because as a currency it will have more utility.
One somewhat controversial property of Bitcoin is its fixed currency supply. There are currently 25 BTC being generated every 10 minutes, and this amount cuts in half every four years. All in all, there will never be more than 21 million BTC in existence. On the other hand, each bitcoin can be split into 100 million pieces (called “satoshis”), so it will not become difficult to use bitcoin if its value goes up the same way it would become problematic to trade with dollars if each penny was enough to buy a car. Thus, all in all, the total number of currency units that will ever exist stands at 2,100,000,000,000,000: 2.1 quadrillion, or about 2^50.899. In choosing this figure, Satoshi was much luckier, or wiser, than most people realize. First of all, the number is considerably less than 2^64-1, the largest integer that can be stored in a standard integer on a
computer - go above that, and the integers wrap around to zero like an odometer.
Shouldn’t we do what satoshi recommends? 2.1 quadrillion satoshis = 21 million bitcoins that is divisional up to 8 digits. 4.3 billion coins that is not divisional, that is quite marginally low. 7 billion people. Ouch, not even 2.7 billion people will have safecoins.
I want include that what makes currency viable is the division. There are good economic history on this particular reasoning.
It’s acceptance as a token of exchange. You must realize that the bitcoin market cap today is insignificant compared to the market caps of the big fiat currencies. For safecoin to have any additional value to the exchange rate to speak of, its market cap must get YUGELY larger than bitcoin’s market cap today.
I think the issue would be scalablilty – SAFE coin works entirely different than bitcoin… For every coin that is transacted you need the consensus of 28 of 32 nodes that 'babysit" that coin… That isn’t a big deal if you are spending a few coins, but if you where to have a coin for every SAFEsatoshi and you needed 28 of 32 for each SAFESatoshi the network would be mighty busy.
The correct amount of any currency is any amount, as long as it is infinitely divisible. In order for the network to scale, Safecoin will need to be divisible to accommodate an infinite growing number of users. Without enough oil to go around the engine well seize.
I would need a separate computer to farm. Otherwise the computer I use would get too overloaded. Bandwidth could be another problem, if people have to pay per GB sent or received. If I remember correctly, someone said that bandwidth will be a bigger cost for a decentralized system than data storage.
Because the fan in my computer starts to speed up whenever there is too much processing going on. The farming software needs to do a lot of processing, disk access and network communication.
Do you know how much exactly this will tax your computer? Im guessing no, and everything you think is speculation. From what the devs have said and the example software that has been given so far; the computer resources consumed by the software will be very minimal.