It’s not given directly to the farmer, but in-directly. It’s just a delay before it’s transferred to someone else. Burning coins is supposed to be an irreversible action and this concept was first introduced in bitcoin as the action of sending bitcoin to an address where the private keys are unobtainable. And by the way, if nobody requests data on the network and nobody gets paid, how is the network supposed to be sustainable? The whole idea is for farmers to be rewarded on GET requests, if the coins do not enter the economy again, that’s a sign of maid dying.
3 Likes
my bad - yes - then it’s nut burned but spent as @jlpell said 
well - in the case of nobody requesting data it is not - and that would at the same time mean nobody is using safe … in which case the thing Should (!) die …
2 Likes
here we go … there is not enough coin for every single person on this planet to have a complete one …
4 Likes
@riddim You said that
and you also admit that it’s not sustainable:
Do you see the contradiction?
When maid turns deflationary the farming rewards increase to incentivize hosting, this increases inflation/supply and pressure on the price. That invalidates your argument.
It means something. It means we’re looking at potentially as much as 50% inflation the first year (if not more?) and is unlikely to experience less than 10% inflation for decades. For comparison countries usually target inflation rates like 2.5%. As an investor this is a valid concern. Right now there is nobody who can answer what inflation will be, people are making guesses but no clear algorithm with accompanying charted estimated has been presented. You can’t simply ignore the economic facts that inflation entails.
Second, inflation is just a small concern here. Why is 40 coins per person number relevant? Maid will need to be divisible long before then. You do realize the entire monetary supply of the world is $90.4 trillion right? Claiming that maid being worth $85.9 trillion is only a “brief stop” on the way up is not just hopelessly naive, it’s bordering deceptive.
Where are we at the moment ? Is fleming far away?
all i said was that safe is not sustainable in case it is not being used/needed by the world - and that’s perfectly okay imho
nobody will be able to answer this because we don’t know how the adoption curve will look like … that’s pure speculation …
may you have a look here and please specify what money exactly you are talking about …?
1 Like
and there is 544 trillion invested in derivatives 
so how can there only be 90 trillion $ …?
…i don’t want to argue about 20k per coin or not … and honestly i don’t care … i’m not a speculator but just a follower of the project and i love the tech …
…but the numbers and how you present them seem to me to be taken a bit out of context …
2 Likes
That’s not all you said. First you responded to my comment where I said there’s inflation by stating:
Your first argument is contradicting your last. You can’t have it both ways. Which one is it?
You don’t need to know the adoption curve to answer the question. You can have a set emission rate algorithm where adoption is x and provide that curve.
See “Broad money” here: source
It’s not out of context. It’s real world valuations. You’re expecting safe to be worth more than all of the world’s companies, COMBINED, and you expect this valuation to be a “brief stop” before going much higher. It’s completely out of touch with any and all economic realities and those very basic comparisons should show that clearly.
did you seriously re-post the source that i mentioned myself as if it was a new source?
??? i never (!) did say that … but of course you can think whatever you want 
yeah - sure - and the answer will be super realistic - let me help you here:
say adoption is pure storage - no GETs …
which leads me to deflation
?! no..? to my knowledge i never said something else - and safe would not be sustainable in that scenario - yes
but to respond with a more reasonable statement as well …
… as long as the safecoin-algorithm / farming algorithm isn’t agreed on and implemented there will be nobody who could tell you any supply-curve based on any demand-curve … so what you are asking for is nonsense at this point in time … sorry …
ps: oh - and have a nice life 
4 Likes
Another consideration is that it’s not set in stone that maidsafe will become successful in all areas, maidsafe can become a massive success with regards to file hosting and decentralized web, while at the same time fail spectaculary with regards to money. By the time of launch (2020? 2021?) cryptocurrencies will have had a lot of time to develop further. It’s going to be an enourmous uphill battle to compete with the early adopter advantage of giants such as bitcoin and ethereum at that point.
If the only use case for maid is a decentralized web the prices are more likely to be based on supply and demand for storage and those may not reach anywhere near the kind of valutions a currency is able to. Then even $100 may be unrealistic unless maid is able to capture a very large market share of that market.
For example the dedicated file hosting market in 2018 is less than 6 billion. We’re talking lower digits billions here. The entire cloud storage market was estimated to be $25.171 billion in 2017. What market cap does say 50% (which would be an enormous share) of that justify?
Derivatives is not the same as money (coins, deposit in bank etc), the source shows that.
Right. So for now we only know that it’s likely to inflate very heavily for a period of a few decades. Then we’re back to start of the argument.
So my first argument would be that bitcoin up until now would be considered deflationary no? So in that sense you are basing fiat currency that can be printed at will without controls to this or another crypto so not an even comparison. The 40 coins means nothing other than just showing how few coins a person would have at fully supply with 100 million users. That’s a ton of users but with true adoption over a decade it would be small. I’m not sure where you came up with the 85 trillion number but I didn’t say that. You can certainly argue that there will be more Han the current supply after launch if you would like but claiming that the market will be flooded haphazardly with coins after launch is equally deceptive.
There is a difference between money and currency. The vast majority of what this world’s population uses is currency.
I totally agree with warz regarding Safecoin’s potential future price.
Personally I’d also be more than happy to see $10 in the future. Imagining astronomical future prices is just day dreaming.
The way to stay grounded in this price prediction area is to always consider the market cap necessary to support such a price.
5 Likes
Some people will let humans dictate their currency policy, have fun kids.
I would rather let the SAFE Network dictate my monetary policy. SAFEcoin it’s value is PUTs as simple as that.
As for fiat currency take “to the moon” literately on this one 
Amazon’s aws runs half the web, the decentralized and autonomous version of this is…
1 Like
The idea that if Maid delivers all of these different ways to use the technology and the ceiling is $10 is more irrational than saying it will be $1000. I think people relcuctant to make bolder predictions and rather be short than long. At full supply what is 40 billion in the world market place? Literally nothing. There is so much liquidity, assets like the real estate market ect. all tied up and an autonomous internet with its own currency, storage, privacy ect. Is worth 40 billion and that’s assuming all the coins are released? It all needs to be delivered but this $10 high water mark is plain dumb.
3 Likes
Guys, I will just say one thing.
You all should read with more attention, @warz made many good points, and then he got many answers that were off the mark, personal attack by @neo included. Then he started to write in a more reactive/confronting way.
What I want to point out, is that if you read the text more carefully then you will understand better both parties, and avoid unnecessary confusion.
And yes, the original enthusiastic @Zoki comment was absolutely delusional, but he made it in a innocent way like a child would speak about his favorite candy, and wasn’t a serious prediction.
About Safecoin supply, there will be an initial (very brief) deflationary period as users store data, and then a sustained inflation as users browse the net. There may be deflationary moments with the launch of video streaming services and such, but probably each big upload will mean big downloads afterwards, and inflation of course.
Bitcoin has been very inflationary in the first years, and yet it increased in value exponentially, because adoption had a stronger effect on the price. As long as we have an adoption growth rate superior to the inflation we should see a price increase. If it is the other way around… Well, it has been nice knowing you 
Two more things:
At current prices buying safecoin is the equivalent of buying bitcoin when it was 40$ the piece.
there is around half safecoin per human 4.2B/7B
Love you all and no hard feelings please
8 Likes
I guess those of us who are happy with maidsafes progress, are confident the algo will be witten taking these concerns into account.
Until then its all just hot air.
3 Likes
It is deleted, that is destroyed, becomes non-existent. A bit like python’s parrot.
The address that the coin existed at becomes available for a new coin to be created randomly or never again depending on (pseudo) random events with farming.
Farming rewards come from the network’s own store of “non-existing coin” addresses.
There is no direct or closely linked relationship between people spending coins to PUT and farmers being paid. For one, people spend a coin to by a “PUT Balance” so the spending of coins does not mean 1 coin’s worth of PUTs is immediately used. For some users who send emails and respond occasionally to forums might take a year or more to use that coin’s worth of PUTs
The relationship is very loose, all it means is that the network has more empty addresses from which to issue coins. For instance the network could go for years without any more coins being spent (assuming data was PUT previously using existing coins)
3 Likes
I was getting at the unsustainable claim of how fast the issuance of the remaining coin will be. Even reinforced by the claim of 50% in the first year. As this is contrary to the design goals of safecoin then I responded to that in blunt terms.
The issue of 20K per coin, well that is a different matter and I don’t think its happening anytime soon or ever and some good points were made on both sides of the argument. But as to the rate of issuance of coins, then there has been a lot of discussions and clear goals of the project stated. And so I can clearly refute the claims being made by some individuals.
I am sorry you saw it as a personal attack instead of attacking the points and due to the lack of reading on the matter.
7 Likes
Agree. In the end, the market will value it and I’m intrigued with what the number will be annually for the next decade