I’d add that cloud computing has also done a decent job of offering good value and consistency here too. Unless there are other benefits, I question the value of adding blockchains to the mix.
Safe network has the niche of being able to provide cheaper storage at the margins, due to using spare local storage. Filecoin seems to have completely ignore this market.
Also, safe network has the anonymity angle, the store once and forever model, free read access, self healing, self authentication, etc. If I were building decentralized apps, these would all be on my wish list.
If I just wanted cheap storage, I’d probably just go with AWS S3 or some such, especially for enterprise software/clients.
With budget they have, they can continue with uploads for several years.
I see it very important to see filling space even slowly to keep miners interested to continue and it could lead to persuade new customers to join.
I really hope we don’t need to rush and push coins out as a reward to get them in peoples hands rather than sitting in a wallet .
I get it is a honeypot to theives, but say a big company like Netflix started using us as storage, the content would be viewed many times all for the price of one upload.
I know well get some caching, but wothout a big reserve of coins to continually pay the vaults I dont see how its sustainable to pay 1 upload fee, and use many times more costly resources in serving that data over and over for eternity.
It saves the app developer having to run infrastructure and pay for cloud storage, which needs to be funded in some way. It also gives the user privacy and security that their data remains theirs. They also don’t get ads pushed on them.
That is just for regular apps too. I suspect some apps will be more oriented towards being distributed, safe and secure. These may rely on not trusting a 3rd party to store your data, etc.
1.- The use of an application does not necessarily imply the saving of data so it is free for the user and produces benefits for the creator of the application (10% of the paid GETs).
2.-The user of an application is a potential Node and any Node is a potential data user simply because it will have the necessary tokens.
3.-People pay for anti-virus, for VPN, for cloud services, for storage… if the service benefits them they will consider paying.
I agree there’s a massive opportunity for Safe apps. Data breaches alone create a massive opportunity, and people are genuinely unhappy with existing services and data exploitation even though few know the true extent of this. This will only increase, plus as @Traktion points out, there are very significant benefits for developers too.
Enumeration and highlighting the benefits of Safe apps is something that the community could help with. Initially showing the benefits to developers and once apps come online, broadening the approach to inform users too.
I think with the comparison to Filecoin or Sia we are getting only part of the picture. For me Safenetwork is much bigger box and we shoud not limit our thinking too much by comparing ourselves to these services.
Filecoin like any other cloud storage is time based and when you stop paying, your data stop to exist. Paid file storages exist almost as long as the internet exists, why do you thing people have mountains of CDS/DVDs/BluRays and external HDDs at home? It gives them sense of freedom, eternity, independency, something that would exist even without them doing monthly payment or relying on some company not changing their licencing policy.
I gues most of us here ale technical people with strong logical thinking, but all people are not like that, they rely more on feelings… Add that to the equation too.
If we can make people believe Safenetwork is reliable enough that the data will be around longer than they will live and for only one payment, we wont be figthing for a market share with other services, we will be creating new market just for ourselves!
Another parallel: Remember how Gmail won over other email services? They said people will never have to delete old messages. Do I access my 15y old messages? No. Do I feel better I can access them if needed? Yes!
One question where I dont have any idea - does anybode have a gues what will be ratio between data direcly stored by users and data stored by apps using Safenetwork as a backend?
I think a couple key differences to storage solutions are:
There is going to be web sites from the beginning. I suppose there is going to be big variety what these sites contains. As they stay up and get older, their existence serves to prove the data storage aspect. I also suppose these sites are going to be interesting and maybe partly wild in a way the early web used to be and Tor is now. I any case that content doesn’t need to conform to restrictions of the web that is funded by advertisements. And maybe not even restrictions, but kind of “optimizations”, or… I don’t know how to put it, really. I just expect things to be designed differently, in every respect, when advertisement and “decency” are not necessary, or at least not so abundant, or dominating.
There is going to be apps.
Sites and apps are the things that are going to draw more interest to the network in general.
I am personally not interested in Sia, Storj or Filecoin for example, because other storage solutions are already good and cheap enough for my average Joe kind of purposes. And I don’t trust that they are going to stay around for very long. So they are kind of closed, empty notebooks for me. I’m waiting for Safe Network more as a consumer of content, rather than as a storage solution, or content producer. Sure, I’ll backup my stuff there, but the point for me is to “surf the web” and stumble upon this and that.
Absolutely. Focusing on storage alone isn’t enough. It will be crucial to cultivate a thriving ecosystem of third party dApp developers. This (along with the high-speed, low-fee, privacy-preserving features of SafeNet Token) will provide strong points of differentiation and rational for broad Network usage.
Storage is commodity, cheap and getting cheaper all the time. It’s a dead end. I haven’t tried Filecoin and Storj (not for a while anyway) but SIA is less convenient to use than standard alternatives, and if you forget to sync up every few weeks it deletes your files. Safe has the potential to be so much more than just storage for all the reasons mentioned by others.
I don’t see why rapid inflation in token supply would be necessary when the token has divisibility. Rewards need not be allocated in whole tokens. The value of a single token should increase to the point where a sub-unit of the token isn’t enough to economically cover the necessary reward volume. Only then should new tokens be minted.
With regards to whether people will use dApps, the answer is simply based on whether the dApps:
Offer anything differentially beneficial to the user (which could be as seemingly trivial as crypto kitties or practical like a GitHub alternative)
Yes, you’re no doubt correct.
Not even sure what I read in this post that made me think of this issue, as it is off topic really.
David mentioned in another thread the idea of pushing coins out quickly so they were not able to be stolen as they wouldn’t be in a network controlled wallet.
Hopefully the idea of puzzles and multiple wallets and not minting everything at once will be enough to be sure we don’t need to do that.
Just in my mind without a large supply of tokens to continue paying vaults ( if they are pushed out quickly for security ) we could run dangerously low on remaining tokens to secure and supply the data.
Would you spend gold? Would you buy a small portion of something that costs tens or hundreds of dollars to buy bread with it? I would not. This thing is valuable and I would keep it.
People spend the bad (cheap) money and keep the good (expensive) money. So I think one way to get people to spend Safes is to make a safe look very cheap. Ie instead of 4 billion tokens we need 4 trillion for example. So 1 safe will look cheap and it will be easier for people to spend it instead of keeping it.
At MAID to Safe Network Token we’d add 3 decimal places to the value?
This would give the appearance of looking cheaper but I’m not sure it would cause people to speculate with their coins. You had said this is what people prefer.
If we are to appeal to them we would want them to speculate with their coins on Safe Network correct?
It would not. Rather it would cause people to devalue the project as a whole. The only way to get people to “speculate” is to persuade them there is value worth gambling (i.e. spending existing funds for prospect of future gain) upon. That value need not necessarily be an astronomical ROI in a strictly monetary sense. The value is simply realized pleasure (or avoided pain). When you spend your money (or other resource) on anything you’re gambling that you’ll get something worthwhile from the trade—whether that’s trying out a new restaurant, reading a book, getting a crypto kitty, dating someone new, or investing in BTC.
I was initially talking about speculation as holding and waiting for a certain price to sell.
But your question was about how to get people to use the token. I think a cheap token will be more used. So I think that if we have more tokens the price of one will be lower. Of course, the initial investors will get more tokens when exchanging for Safes, for example 1 maid = 1000 Safes…
