Wasn’t the Omni protocol supposed to be updated at some point to make trading easier?
1 Like
If Brock Pierce still own 10% of all safecoins he could be a great help in navigating a transition from Omni to ERC20.
How is this for a compromise?
Leave Maidsafecoin as an OMNI token, for now. But when SAFEcoin is created, make it ERC20 compliant. Not having SAFEcoin as ERC20 compliant would be a substantial drawback for the SAFE Network. 
Who needs ERC 20 when the world has SAFEcoin?
1 Like
This doesn’t make any sense. SAFE network doesn’t run the EVM. Are you proposing that safecoins be created in the Ethereum network instead of the SAFE network?
3 Likes
Are you saying that ERC20 SAFEcoin makes no sense at all? What good is it to have ERC20 Maidsafecoin, get all the trading benefits of this extensive change, then create SAFEcoin which takes away all of those benefits? SAFEcoin would be a step backward. People who bought ERC20 Maidsafecoin to trade on the exchange might not even want SAFEcoin. Who is going to tell all of these people the new coin isn’t tradeable?
If SAFEcoin can’t be ERC20 compliant, Maidsafecoin can’t be ERC20 compliant either.
If we can’t integrate with the Ethereum Network we will be competing with it. They have an enormous head start.
Right. Just as MAID coins live in the Bitcoin network, SAFE coins will also live on a different network. ERC-20 is relevant only to networks running the Ethereum virtual machine (ie Ethereum), and a bridge is required to interoperate with any external network. So no problem to have a similar bridge between SAFE network and Ethereum. I think the confusion is the use of the word “compliant”, which to me means that SAFE coins would implement the ERC20 interface, which doesn’t make sense because they don’t live on a network that runs the EVM.
4 Likes
That makes total sense. If that is the case then the Maidsafe devs can just wait for individual speculators to create that SAFE/Ethereum bridge so the speculators can have a trading advantage. The speculators will do the work and they will get the trading benefits. The Maidsafe devs don’t have to take resources away from building the network to build this bridge then, right?
1 Like
Right, no Maidsafe involvement required
3 Likes
Because OMNI.MAID is difficult to trade/acquire for many people today. The value of ERC20.MAID is the same as the OMNI version except it’s more fungible/exchangeable today. This should help to alleviate some of the bottlenecks currently hampering access to MAID and ultimately access to SAFE in the lead up to launch.
This is very true and will likely be the case. That being said, for a third party to invest to create the bridge requires recognized value in doing so. Right now, the ability to recognize value in SAFE is constrained by poor MAID market performance and the absence of MVP/MVE among other things.
The ability to leverage ERC20.MAID may help to more directly alleviate the former concern and indirectly alleviate the latter. However, the availability of ERC20.MAID alone will not be the panacea that cures all.
1 Like
One is not like the other.
Not everything need be a competition!
Interest in safecoin, will be relative to SAFE network the utility it provides.
While ETH and crypto have a truely awful amount of invest for profit clowns, and some of that will affect every sphere where there is value being traded, the real value lies in the utility.
So, there is merit is any bridge into other areas that allows SAFE to be accessible… that does not suggest a competition, just a route to SAFE finding its place in the world. If ETH can channel wealth by exchange from whatever into ETH/ETH20/ETH21 and into SAFE, that is a bonus. Having the option to do the inverse and sell safcoin, is equally important for allowing markets to support users interest and confidence.
All this chatter about ETH20 is either about pre-launch or post-launch and those are different cases. Arguably post-launch is more important.
1 Like
And for SAFEcoin, once the network is fully alive the interest in getting the utility coin will increase (some say skyrocket) and the issue of it being an anonymous coin will be worked out since its overwhelming primary purpose is a unility coin to buy resources on the network.
Also when there are 2 billion coins existing ERC20 will look like a chump change market.
So for MAID ERC20 make a lot of sense assuming both OMNI & ERC20 version can co-exist and better again if can go back to OMNI at any time.
But for SAFEcoin there is not the need to make it more visible since people will want it because of the network. If they don’t want the network then SAFEcoin fails anyhow
2 Likes
It’s coming whether they want it or not. Just a matter of time for Maid ERC20 to be released 
1 Like