One problem with a flat inflation is that it will almost be like pre-mining since the first farmers will have an enormous advantage. Let’s say that there are only 100 farmers during the first month and the flat inflation rate is 1 billion coins per year. Then in that first month those 100 farmers will on average grab 800,000 coins each! Compare with 1000,000 farmers two years later when each farmer will only earn on average 80 coins during one month.
Another potential problem is that if the value of the coin gets too low in the future, then many farmers will stop farming and thereby there is a risk that the whole network comes crashing down.
In the beginning coins will mostly only be hoarded and traded. But that’s enough to increase the market cap and the value of the coin a lot. And this can go on for a year or more easily. That’s ok, but for the market cap to really skyrocket the coin has to become so popular that you can buy a coffee at Starbucks with it. That’s the long-term vision. Divisibility, super fast transactions, and zero transaction fees are a must I believe in order to make the coin really competitive. If it’s possible, the fork could use account-to-account transactions instead of actual coins. Then everything from microtransactions to million coin transactions will be very efficient.
Why? Why would they be hoarded and traded? What value do they have? Again of what practical use are they? You STILL haven’t answered this. Beyond being hoarded and traded what good are they? What can they be used for?
The coin must be a good cryptocurrency for it to compete with the existing cryptocurrencies. In fact, the coin must be much better than the existing coins. I recently found this interesting comment:
"Furthermore, if Bitcoin’s value were simply a function of all of the technological aspects, then there’s no reason that Bitcoin wouldn’t easily be supplanted by another crypto-currency that has better features …
For example Litecoin, the second-biggest player in the game, advertises that if you transact in Litecoin you get faster confirmation times and that the whole system can handle more volume than Bitcoin." – Why Bitcoin Has Value
Litecoin, which has faster confirmation times and can handle more volume than Bitcoin has a much smaller market cap than bitcoin. Why? Here is one explanation:
So it seems that a new coin needs to be much better than bitcoin in order to be competitive. Just a little bit better, like Litecoin, isn’t enough. Will a fork produce a good enough coin? Maybe! It depends on how popular it becomes.
That is an assumption not a fact. You can compete in any market and yet make a crappy product. Just watch late night infomercials sometime to confirm this. Just because it’s a new cryptocurrency doesn’t make it a BETTER cryptocurrency. Moreover your modded safecoin won’t be competing just with the bitcoin network and it’s derivitives but also with the fully functional SAFE network as well. So again I ask what practical use is the coin?
Safecoin is superior to bitcoin in many ways. Two potential drawbacks however is that safecoins have to be delivered one by one as I understand it, and I have a question about if safecoin will be divisible or not. That’s why I mentioned account-to-account transactions as an alternative to individual coins. An account is just a number. So if Alice wants to send Bob 0.53 coins then in the transaction Alice’s account is reduced by 0.53 and Bob’s account is increased by 0.53. Very efficient. So the new coin will not only be superior to bitcoin, it will also be better than safecoin. And the coin can quickly become popular as a general currency.
Yes, why not just use the SAFE network as if the need for divisibility becomes practical then they’ll implement it. And you STILL haven’t explained a practical use for the coins. Look on the SAFE network it’s a closed loop. You give the network resources, the network awards you safecoin and then you spend that safecoin in order to get resources back fro the network. How does your system equate to that? What are you spending your coin in order to GET? A new user comes a long and sees your system, he then sees the original safe network sitting right beside it that’s functioning beautifully. Who do you think he’s going to invest his time, money and energy into?
I for one got into bitcoin and safecoin to get AWAY from infinite market caps. The fact that there is a limit on the number of coins produced ADDS value to the coins to me. If you were to remove that cap then I would be LESS inclined to invest money in your new cryptocurrency as it would be less valuable and of a higher risk. In short it would start smelling like fiat currency. I want a currency that acts like a physical resource, like a barter economy and NOT some fictional token made out of thin air with the only value given to it being that of belief. I don’t want another faith token I want real money.
So far you have not told me anything that your coin actually does or provides on it’s own. It doesn’t allow me to download additional resources from your network because those are all free. It doesn’t allow me to upload resources to your network because those are also all free. The only physical resources it’s backed by are those used to mine it but wait is there even a cap on how many can be produced? No. So you’re just printing money. So your new coin based on safecoin is WORTHLESS.
That reason being the absence of a significant market for the “superior” features. I wouldn’t have any hopes for SafeCoin outside of the context of the SAFE Network. I think there is a significant market for the security and privacy features of the network. Then the cool features of SafeCoin become the cherry on top of the cake.
A fork would need to have some clear, qualitative technical advantage. I.e., it can do something the old network can’t. For example, Ethereum is claimed to be suitable for smart contracts, unlike Bitcoin.
But if the SAFE core devs are on top of their game, they will implement/absorb demonstrably advantageous innovations devised by alt-SAFE competitors, while keeping backward compatibility with existing nodes (i.e., a soft fork, inside SAFE). That’s the model that Bitcoin follows (a bit hopefully).
And then SAFE will be (my hack meme contribution for the day)…
Stunned if this changed but its GPL3 of some flavor so no. It encourages forks. Its properly copy -left. And if that’s changed I guess it waa evidence that the project has sold out and is no longer serious.
I have changed my mind about forking the SAFE network. I have a new idea. Maybe infeasible practically, but anyway. The idea is a high-churn network.
As I understand it, churn in a distributed network means that people often switch on and off their computers and other interruptions like that of nodes in the network. The new strategy I think of is to expect and build a distributed network based on expecting massive churn.
Instead of storing data permanently such as on hard drives, the nodes instead keep high-volatile and churn-prone data of the network mainly in RAM.
My idea is that the trend towards the future is a society without the need for money, even without the need of cryptocurrencies. Instead the high-churn network will use quid pro quo of data sharing between users, like David Irvine’s initial idea of the SAFE network in the days before cryptocurrencies were known.
In the churn network, millions of people will run around with things like 5G smartphones, and then 6G and WiGig, Wifi 6, 7 and so on. And with access to huge bandwidth, data chunks can be swapped around constantly, be copied and destroyed at a fast rate, so there is never any need for storing any of the data on the network permanently.
I just want to add that, what if a user wants to store terabytes of photos and videos on the high-churn network? Then that can be added as storage services on top of the high churn network! Such as IPFS. Those services will require disk storage, at least when using the technology we have today.
Even paid-for cloud storage solutions can be added on top of the new network. And then later in a relatively near future, if Ray Kurzweil is correct, data storage will become dirt cheap and even free I believe, and then it’s a simple task for a user to move data from paid solutions to future free storage solution, while the foundational high churn network remains the same.
