Thats what i thought aswell, but this usdt hype brought so much attention and so much people wanna buy now, i think this was just the start of getting some more mainstream adoption, dont forget crypto in general is still pretty small if you valuate it as for example a company, but instead over 100 company’s are working on the blockchain already from exchanges to factom to maidsafe.
I do understand your calculations, but i was more wondering where you get the 10 trillion number from, did you do some extended research ? Cause 10 trill looks a lot to me with all this competition pop up.
im really curious about the token part of the Safenetwork and how this will be handled, does it need safecoins and how much. Cause if the tokens can have the same fundamentals as safecoin and they will be also free to send then this can influance the safecoin price a lot.
No other token will have the same fundamentals in that no other token will be accepted by the network to pay for its resources, and all farmers will be paid only in Safecoin.
Other tokens will also be very cheap or potentially free to send & fast etc, but they will need to have a reason for holding value, e.g. Clikes paying for advertising on Decorum based systems.
That i understand but that also takes away value from safecoin, but is great for the network.
I can understand your perspective, but I’m not sure it takes away value from Safecoin - if the Safe network became the best place by far to create & use crypto tokens for any purpose, many more people will use the network, sign up for accounts, dabble in other uses of the network & eventually farm or buy Safecoin to upload data or create their own tokens.
This will all add value to SafeCoin, and I think to a greater degree than if those people used ERC20 or an alternative instead.
4 Likes
I do agree on that like i said great for the network, but the token transfer can be done with own tokens making the need to hold safecoin much lower. with 1 safecoin you will be able to do some insane tx.
but i do see also the positive side from this all think about billion IOT devices connected with smart city’s be connected on the network, sending billions of tx, that will add up to a lot of for the network
2 Likes
I’m sorry if this is a stupid question, but I have to ask. Why would these other tokens be needed at all on the Safe network. Is there something about e.g. Decorum that Clikes will be able to do, but not Safecoin?
They’ll provide access to services that won’t be available without the specific token.
E.g. if you want to pay for premium Decorum features / access, you’ll need to pay in Clikes if Safecoin are not accepted by Decorum.
Decorum could have just accepted Safecoin, but that wouldn’t allow for an ICO, and Decorum couldn’t be developed with the same resourcing.
Some other examples of useful Safe based tokens could be:
- Tokens that are pegged to USD / EUR / Gold etc
- Local alternative currency tokens
- License access tokens (e.g. for music, video, software, design, patent etc licenses)
- Share holding tokens
- Bonds
- Property ownership certificates
- Any other tokens that enable access to specific Safe based software or systems that people want to use
1 Like
Why buy Apple when you can have USD?
1 safecoin = 1 safecoin. Today. Tomorrow. Next year.
1 xcoin = 1 safecoin today. 2 safecoin tomorrow. 0.1 safecoin next year.
Different tokens change value independently.
Each follows its own underlying thing’s value.
National currency follows country’s economy.
This is why one global currency is bad idea.
Maybe my question wasn’t clear. I’m wondering why I would have to use one currency to buy Apple and another currency to buy IBM.
To create buffer between independent markets.
Example: You buy clike tokens. Decorum prices can now be set independently of safecoin. And: Safecoin can crash, you already have your clikes.
Another: Cars run on gasoline. Not dollar. So you need gasoline. And: You are a “prepper” so you buy 10,000 gallons of gasoline. Next day The Sh** Hits the Fan but you don’t care because you already have gasoline.
Hope the low prices hold out till bonus payout.
If you look at the troughs between the previous highs they last a few months with random bits of noise.
Could dip low again I hope.
Today Simon Black in his blog advanced the theory that Mark Zuckerberg may be on his way to becoming a global central banker. By abolishing all ICO advertizing on Facebook while investing in blockchain R&D for his company if he produces a Facebook blockchain token he has a global market in the palm of his hand. Interesting concept.
3 Likes
He could create the most most widely used currency ever if he delved into crypto via Facebook.
1bn people with a new way to earn, save, and spend money would be revolutionary, and heavily flawed if its all in Facebook’s control or for their benefit over others.
I hope crypto can disrupt Facebook before facebook disrupts crypto.
6 Likes
Didn’t Facebook already try doing this? I seem to remember Facebook credits or some such a few years ago.
Eh, it would be the opposite of anonymous and decentralized. Also, what would be the factor deciding the distribution?
I think that crediting people with any valuable currency for likes or followers would, if anything, lead to corrupting Facebook as a whole. I think it would go all down. I mean, this is the first year it stopped growing, right? It’s just a single source, but I do believe it may be pointing towards the world being kinda past its Facebook phase.
I mean the whole thing turned into mess. It’s the Tower of Babel of the internet era. It’s now worse and messier than MySpace has ever been.
4 Likes
Well, they could make it anonymous, but not likely decentralised. Unless they literally just made a legit crypto with a premine to benefit themselves & gave all of their users a wallet by default, but I doubt they’d go for that.
Just playing with the concept, but if Facebook found a way to create a currency that it controlled or uniquely benefited from, and get to its over 1bn users, it could certainly be quite influential.
I agree though - Facebook won’t last forever. Social media network effects need to be a thing of the past by giving the network back to the people who can choose between various front ends. I hope the Safe network can enable this before long!
This is what Ted Livingston is trying to accomplish with KIN. I was skeptical at first but the philosophy he preaches is trying to unite all the digital service underdogs who cant compete with FB.
They will announce partners Q1 Im excited to see who gets in. Clock is ticking.
1 Like
It would definitely be an interesting experiment. So far, the relevant crypto projects always had a core of developers and a small following at the beginning. They grew in accordance with its actual relevance / utility. And the core was always a bunch of intelligent and creative folks. That’s why I think some of these projects survive all those ups and downs and the roller coaster ride, even a quick buck (because for the developers, it’s never really that quick).
On the other hand, FB is this behemoth with so many users, many of whom are, to say it honestly, dipshits. I personally know plenty of smart people who were there when it started – and haven’t been there for ages.
One has to wonder how this giant virtual organism would react if you threw huge money on all of its cells. If it lasted though, at least for the while it did, Mark would be arguably the most powerful man on Earth. Which brings us to another question.
Governments. Facebook with a functional currency system would have the real chance at becoming the true first full-fledged internet economy as well. It’s no longer an academic asylum. You have bakers and plumbers and baby-sitters there. Would governments agree? I mean, it’s pretty easy to ban FB.
1 Like
2 Likes