MaidSafe Dev Update - February 23, 2017

[joshuef]

I am and shall do! Not back until spring though

[harryharry89]

Joshuef Lightyear
I am also in Berlin and would love to join if/when you guys decide to hang.

[Blindsite2k]

@whiteoutmashups

If MD means the end of that, then I am not for it at all, and am very very worried!

Well i don’t think they’re charging on the safecoin but rather the data. If my understanding is correct Mutable data is data you can change. So every time you make a change you’re uploading new data, thus spending safecoin. Still it’s something to discuss and clarify.

[tfa]

@maidsafe

Every successful mutation request now would deduct account balance (previously POST was free and went straight to the DataManagers)

It is a very long time promise that is about to be broken. I have been following Maidsafe for more than 3 years and it has always been specified that a SD cost more than an immutable data (price/size ratio is 10 times higher), but in exchange, they can be freely updated, as many times as wanted. Now that SDs are replaced by MDs, this feature should be transferred to them.

It is very useful for sites having a fixed number of dynamic files. You could just replace them, it was easy and free (if their size was < 3KB).

[digipl]

I completely agree with you. Update a mutable data, must be free. If maybe not the 1MB limit yes, at least, small files.
If not the safe network loose one of its fundamental characteristics.

[frabrunelle]

@happybeing

Is this a change to the pricing model - I thought @whiteoutmashups asked recently if this was changing and was answered no. So I thought plan was same as for SD, e.g. pay a premium for creation but then nothing for updates.

No objection here, just seeking clarification on the plan / options.

With Mutable Data, the data flow itself is different. It’s going through multiple hops (MaidManagers and then DataManagers), unlike Structured Data which is going straight to DataManagers. We will need to see the impacts it will have and what would be the best charging ratio.

@tfa

It is a very long time promise that is about to be broken. I have been following Maidsafe for more than 3 years and it has always been specified that a SD cost more than an immutable data (price/size ratio is 10 times higher), but in exchange, they can be freely updated, as many times as wanted. Now that SDs are replaced by MDs, this feature should be transferred to them.

None of the current storage costs are final in the first place (this is all pre-safecoin), we will need to work out storage costs in terms of safecoin when that gets implemented. Quite a lot is still in the design and implementation phase and needs evaluated.

The cost ratio for free mutations needs to get balanced with how much the network is getting taxed processing a mutation. Ultimately something will need to prevent spam and various approaches would have to get tried to study the impact (whether it’s a one time cost that’s maybe higher, whether the network gives an allocated free mutation amount over time, allow the Data object to get defined as something that has its processing cost paid for by someone else and allow free mutations by others, etc.). This of course doesn’t apply to GET which would still go directly to DataManagers.

@whiteoutmashups

If this is true, and SafeCoin transactions will no longer be free, then that is a…

Considering the behavior of MutableData would imply safecoin has X behavior would be incorrect right now as MutableData shouldn’t need to couple itself to safecoin behavior.

Safecoin or particular tag type specifications can have their own rulesets (that’s what the tag type specialisation is for )

[whiteoutmashups]

Thanks for explaining the situation!

Glad to learn that these changes are just tests and experiments, and don’t reflect any motivations to remove free SafeCoin tx’s or the ability to have small bits of data that can be updated for free.

I think none of us really understood that these were only trials / temporary tests

[Tom_Carlson]

Free POSTS == Attack Vector == Bad for the network.

RIght? It’s nice to want things, but you need to be aware that there are consequences to those desires. I want to eat sugar all day long, but I do not.

[anon78865233]

I’m pretty sure the developers of safe know what they are doing. It’s too early to be splitting hairs.

[neo]

@frabrunelle

The cost ratio for free mutations needs to get balanced with how much the network is getting taxed processing a mutation. Ultimately something will need to prevent spam and various approaches would have to get tried to study the impact (whether it’s a one time cost that’s maybe higher, whether the network gives an allocated free mutation amount over time, allow the Data object to get defined as something that has its processing cost paid for by someone else and allow free mutations by others, etc.). This of course doesn’t apply to GET which would still go directly to DataManagers.

AND the other side of the coin is I would expects that farmers will be paid for the mutations.

So more incentive to be a farmer.

[Blindsite2k]

@neo

AND the other side of the coin is I would expects that farmers will be paid for the mutations.

So more incentive to be a farmer.

Yeah cost isn’t so much of a problem so long as one can recover it in production (farming). It doesn’t matter if you eat your food so long as you can grow as much or more than you eat and otherwise consume.

[Warren]

I know you can’t humanly go any faster but we need this RIGHT NOW! Freedom in the world depends on it as I think more and more will election outcomes- they hesitate to cheat when transparency means they stand a good chance of getting caught. Thank you for never giving up.

[harshadp08]

Good luck with the internal testing and updates! Better to take our time and do the appropriate internal testing and changes before rolling out additional testnets.

You guys are awesome!! Thank you also so much for your transparency with the project in its entirety.

[tfa]

Besides free POSTs, are there any other fundamental properties of the network that might be reconsidered. I am thinking about:

• free GETs

• PUTs payed once and data stored forever

[davidpbrown]

Form follows function… first resolve what can work and then confirm the very limits of it, inc price.

I’d expect those two elements are fundamental to the idea of what the network is and rooted in its being for everyone; I doubt any answer now can confirm what will necessarily be later.

I’m hoping that at Alpha2 there is a very clear description of immutable and mutable as those are somewhat ambiguous for what they are used for… along with a confirmation of how we interact with safe_client_libs directly with rust and ffi.

From that point then perhaps it’ll be clearer what costs and what can be for free.

[takida]

New to Safenet so haven’t yet read up to how Safenet works, so don’t know if it is applicable…but…
Ripple has normally a very low fee (a very small part of the currency XRP is destroyed) per transaction, but they have a fee escalation mechanism built into the protocol/network in case of spam/DOS that increases the transaction cost:

Transaction Cost | XRPL.org

Besides that there is a an amount of XRPs reserved to be able to create a new account/wallet to prevent an attacker to create huge number of accounts.

[davidpbrown]

yuck ripple. Let’s not go there.

[anon40790172]

@takida

Besides that there is a an amount of XRPs reserved to be able to create a new account/wallet to prevent an attacker to create huge number of accounts.

Welcome to the forum. Creating an account on SAFE won’t be free either. It will probably cost some Safecoin.

[Josh]

@takida

New to Safenet

Good to see you here!

[Warren]

But to clarify that safe coin will generally be generated in the delay after some upfront space is allocated as part of getting an account and as part of the allocation?