Maidsafecoin will be available to swap into Safe Network Token’s when the Safe Network is ready to be released. Safe Network Token’s have not yet been created, they don’t exist yet. Watch out for other projects who ues the name Safecoin as they have nothing to do with The Safe Network developed by Maidsafe.
8 Likes
I know I want to know where we can swipe this tokens in network browser is team making options 
1 Like
Let’s see first how the test-networks goes. To make ways for the future swap is probably the very least problem.
4 Likes
Thanks @Southside and @davidpbrown . Your feedback is important because I am just getting started and I am very impressionable at this stage in my meme career.
10 Likes
No our feedback is unimportant… Remember memes are all about me me me
5 Likes
Wow what a massive update!
13 Likes
Fully support letting the team refactoring code as much as they want.
If anyone bother or push the team, let me know I will fight with them with my keyboard 
.
17 Likes
Yipee kaiyeh
8 Likes
…* me me
Which I wonder is not where that term came from [The term meme is a shortening (modeled on gene) of mimeme] but is an insight into what works… being relatable.
If both Southside and me like it, that’s covering a wide spectrum!.. our feedback is important AND not.
3 Likes
Thanks team.
Looking forward to the day we have a testnet with a nice gui, I know it will come eventually, ill be patient.
3 Likes
It’s worth pointing out that this is not the start of the flow for any user of the Safe Network App. This is the state after they have already installed the browser, which either happens externally, via a specific onboarding flow, or via the home screen with a specific card, which looks like this:
Clicking through from either the list item or the card get’s you to the app screen, which provides more information about the app:
(And of course we can refine the wording further here too.)
Or of course if you are on mobile, you’ll be pinged to the app store where there is further potential to clarify what the app is for.
I get where you are going here, but remember that it expressly cannot be used to browse the Web, so this may be confusing in a different way.
Perhaps not quite as simple as that unfortunately. Remember this is a separate app to the Safe Network App, which may be installed and separately, without the need for the Safe Network App at all. So it’s gonna be pretty unhelpful to simply call it ‘Browser’, and not possible via app stores.
14 Likes
@JimCollinson
Earn Tokens when one is farming. Farming can including picking (apples for instance)
Here is a thought instead of earning the tokens, we are picking the tokens as we/others pick chunks from our node (tree/bush). So what about gathering tokens
Well at least its an alternative since you said you were wondering if there was alternatives to earning.
4 Likes
Oh please don’t! Critique is super important, and very welcome. No one person holds all the answers, and certainly not me 
.
We’re designing a hybrid at the moment, to get to feature complete flows as quickly as possible, and from there we’ll be making platform specific versions. So desktop will get it’s own, which will likely deviate from this the most.
Yes this does matter, and is something we will have to be aware of in development, as “leave no trace” is one of our Network fundamentals.
Could you expand on this thought a little, just so I’m clear what you mean?
The idea is locking/unlocking your Safe is what enables installed safe apps through to your data one that device (via the capability rules you have set up). Locking your safe folds this all away.
There are some caveats to that of course, you may have set up capabilities that allow the app to always be able to access data… this might be a requirement for certain use cases, but would be opt in rather than opt out.
Are you thinking you’ll like a sort of master kill switch, too?
Well yes, it is likely that users will want to download data to their local device for myriad reasons—security hygiene will still be needed—but we hope this will be quite a deliberate and understandable thing.
This is a UI layer on top of the CLI. And it’ll all be open source, so sure, it will provide for that on desktop at least, and I hope people will! Mobile and software offered via app stores is another, trickier question though.
But are we designing it to specifically enable it? No. It would be lovely of course, but would lengthen the design and development process, which isn’t desirable at this stage, and it doesn’t fall within the usecases for our initial group of target user groups.
We haven’t got quite that far yet, but we are keeping one eye on this as the designs progress. E.g. keeping components malleable enough to allow varying string lengths, and not painting ourselves into a corner when it comes to RTL languages etc.
Not currently no. It’s literally a link that you can share as you see fit.
Sure, this will be added in once the symbol becomes apparent.
12 Likes
Maidsafe be like we will be on 2 in the list of crypto 
in just in 3 4 month of network live
Yes but within the Safe Network App itself it could be called Browser to avoid any confusion. Browser would simply be the default choice of Safe Network Browser. Not a biggie though
1 Like
@JimCollinson thanks for the clarification, it seems like it wouldn’t be a real issue in this case. And I can see how just Browser would be confusing, you want to have the same app name here and in the app stores.
But I think the issue extends beyond this page. It could be a confusion in a conversation for instance, if you’re explaining the network to someone. You tell them you can create a Safe, you tell them there’s a Safe browser, they could draw the conclusion that the Safe Browser would be used to browse the contents of their safe, unless you tell them what it’s for.
The name is not as useful anymore to communicate what the browser is for. Once some application that allows you to browse the contents of your Safe is released, that would be even more confusing. Maybe that app should be called a Safe Browser, but can’t now since that’s already taken.
In general, with Safes instead of Vaults, I think it’s important to keep “Safe” and “Safe Network” separated to avoid confusion.
Maybe it’d be more clear what I mean if I wrote it like “Safeweb Browser”, I’m talking about this new web that lives on the Safe Network. Does it have a name? If so, it could be called “<name of network> Browser”. Then there’s no room for confusion. This is a common way to categorize browsing applications (web browsers, file browsers, server browsers), and after a quick search it seems not uncommon for apps to use those as names as well.
4 Likes
If there’s nothing cached and Safe is locked, then that’s the same risk covered off… it’s just a disliking of apps that are active in the background and then the risk that data is visible when user thought they’d closed the app. Still, I wonder a risk of Safe being open and app not visible and expected to be stopped… balanced against that app might be in background and user wants it open. Perhaps a timeout on the locking of Safe but then if getting into a Safe is time consuming that might be a pina.
How easy will it be for a mobile user to enter a significant robust userphrase+password?.. long complex and not stored on device phrases, might be a problem for UI??.. not sure I know an answer for this. PIN numbers and fingerprints perhaps also useful.
2 Likes
How would anyone use the Safe Network on a mobile anyway, won’t it just get instantly banned by the app stores as soon as it is released?
2 Likes
Yeah, I do get the reasoning. And it’s something we’ll have to keep an eye on in testing in the future for sure.
Another solution is to name the browser something slightly more abstract (e.g. Chrome, Safari, Explorer, Firefox etc), but TBH I think we need to propagate the name Safe Network first and foremost, and a level of naming abstraction may mean other UX problems appear, like what do I search for in an app store if I do want to just browse the Network?
I guess this theory is predicated on the idea that a user has a preconceived notion of what Browser means, and they associate it more with generalised ‘exploring of things’ and not ‘exploring website like things’.
I’d hypothesize that users would, on the whole, have a more specific interpretation of what a Browser does.
But there really is only one way to find out!
Side note: it’s Safes instead of Accounts, rather than Vaults.
The Safe Network is the new web. The browser is a way of viewing publically accessible data, such as sites, that are on the Safe Network.
So in a way yes, you are Browsing Safes, just you are only able to view data that someone has made public, or your own private data.
I think this will become more clear once we take into account the complete flows and onboarding. But it is certainly something we will need to watch out for overall.
8 Likes