@Anders Creating something out of thin air has no value. That’s exactly why fiat currency has no value and why we should abandon it: it’s created out of thin air and yet we are paying intrest on it. P=P+I which is unsustainable. Uploading to ANY network is not free as you have ISP costs, computer maintainance costs, and many other costs. Mining is not free as again there are costs for maintaining hardware and paying for electricity. Therefore this idea of having a network where all PUTs are free doesn’t make sense as where is the money coming from? You keep citing dogecoin but dogecoin DOESN’T have value for the simple reason that it doesn’t have much value BECAUSE it’s so easy to mine. You might as well be citing monopoly money or hyper inflated currency from Zimbowae. (I apologize for the spelling errors.)
You also don’t seem to understand that the whole 90% to farmers and 10% to devs thing is a RATIO not a fixed distribution. That is the network values the contribution of farmers 9x as much as that of devs, as in a 9:1 ratio. Farmers DO keep 100% of their earnings, so do devs, and so will content creators for that matter. The network doesn’t get some lump sum of all the safecoin and then divvy out 90% to farmers and 10% to devs and then someone needs to take a cut if we add some third party. No it’s everything is calculated in proportion to how much the network values farming. So if the farming rate is x and the network values farming 9:1 of your position then you are paid 1x/9 (Please correct me if my math is wrong.)
Clearly you have no understanding of economics if you’re saying something like this. Money = barter. Currency = barter. Anything tradable can be utilized as a currency. You could use couches as form of currency if you wanted but they’d be hard to transport BUT you could do it.
Why must a currency be easily transportable? So that it can change hands easily?
Why must a currency be backed by real value? Because if all you need to do is write a note on a piece of paper you start trading debt not value.
Why not give someone a piece of monopoly money and call it real? Because no one in their right mind would give it value. You could get a piece of paper and write numbers on it. Would it be of value? No.
But wait what if you wrote on that paper that someone owed you a measure of work for services rendered. That is what if you wrote out an I.O.U. Now you’re creating DEBT based currency. But we already have that, it’s called fiat currency and we’re trying to get away from that. If money only has value because it represents a portion of purchased debt then your currency is based on usury. And you can have an infinite amount of debt whereas there is a finite amount of resources available on the planet. Debt based currency is not sustainable or realistic.
The only currency of value is that which is backed by a resource of value of some kind be it gold, oil, water, energy, time, or in the case of safecoin energy * information * hardware * time. But at the end of the day safecoin is still a resource backed currency, just like gold or water. And the more you would try to make it “free” the more you would depreciate the value of the currency.
Why would you assume all this, especially with your model where there is nothing to generate income for farmers? How are the farmers getting paid? Where is your coin coming from? Why on earth would you assume many, or even most, early adopters would be cryptocurrency or tech savvy? Maybe they’re just privacy conscious or want to make some easy money or heard about some new way to store their data. Why are you making assumptions?