I like the browser idea for several reasons, but before getting excited over those I’d like to know this is feasible and not easily scammed.
How can we securely validate the PoW here? I think the PoW would need to be contributing to the network and validated by the network rather than in client side code, because the client can be modified to simulate that work, creating an opening for spam account creation. It doesn’t seem feasible without including as vault in the browser. Any other ideas?
You can do a hashcash type thing there. So say every client message has to have 1s appended (better prepended) to the point where the Hash of (message hash + prepended 1s) == <starts with X zeros> (X == difficulty)
This is coded in our resource_proof crate as part of the resource proof 
Yeah, you could have some sort of ‘micro-vault’ type dealio, where we’re not storing & serving files, but contributing other compute resource the network suitable for short bursts, and on mobile, at a lower farming rate, up to an AccountPacket cost.
But let’s start simple… we need full vaults, and we need the ability to transmit Safecoin, so Invites and Desktop Vaults are the low-hanging fruit to get us off the line.
And of course not forgetting just being able to pay in fiat… we could make that pretty slick, but only if a user is willing to trust a 3rd party with payment.
I don’t understand that, but trust it works obvs, so now I’m excited!
Reasons:
This is good UX IMO: information is only presented when needed, at the point the user expresses their wish to do the work of understanding how to do the thing (create an account) they have just decided they want.
Yup, I like it. Only thing I’d wanna be sure of is that we could make the effort useful to the network or POR based; message relay, or routing wizardy etc (but I’m getting technical there 
)
And I like the idea of ring-fencing it at AccountPacket cost, so it halts then, or if the user logs in.
I’ll add it to the long list. Cheers guys.
Invites are coins, effectively, so you could hoover them up. But, if we embarked on something like the cost capped browser based POR as described above, then maybe we don’t need to worry, as it’s all adding to the network power anyway.
The following is an earlier idea of something similar it seems, which was about mobile farming by providing resources for a push mechanism on the network: Safe Gossip protocol - #15 by bochaco
In fact this requires no coding on the network side and the new user simply adds the gifted coinBalance account to their account creation.
Its the various mechanisms that allow this. Person gifts it, or new user buys it from an outlet of some kind.
I know that the chicken and egg problem with SAFE accounts and safecoins has been discussed a lot already, but my proposal is still: Make all PUTs free and then that solves the problem. I think the fear of spam attacks is overblown. Farmers will still earn safecoins for GETs without end users having to pay for PUTs.
And still as naive and suicidal as it was at first.
MaidSafe can limit the number of SAFE accounts until the network is big enough to handle unlimited access. Compare that to having to pay for PUTs, how many people would want to use a solution like that? I’m talking about the general public here and not just the tech savvy early adopters.
If all PUTs are free, and I was running a vault.
I get rewarded with coins, that are essentially worthless, as they are not needed to use the network.
So what, you then need to pay to browse the net?
How many people pay for websites and cloud storage now? A lot I think – and it will be a more attractive proposal with SAFE as storage is pay once store forever - that’s a really huge deal -I’m still unsure of the long term economics of it, but still a great deal that will attract a lot of people - even grandma wanting to store family pics and movies forever. Free puts with forever storage though - that just won’t work economically the network would go bankrupt. The SAFE network doesn’t create/print money it has a limited amount and must balance inflows of coins (from puts) with outflows of coins (to farmers).
To be clear, there is no fee to browse SAFE, only to store data (puts) on SAFE.
Very much agree. We have one testnet brought down very quickly and I’m sure @Anders will discount that somehow. I am sure I am not alone in that I would be uploading all the data I have and not worrying about how many temp files I used or how they were stored. App developers would not give a flying s*** as to the number of temp files they created for the user as the App progressed.
Farmers would earn coin for no reason what so ever since the coin has no use, is not needed for the network and be like pretty shells on the beach that are there in their thousands/millions
So now the network has to keep track of people connecting to it to stop that spammer who made so many accounts in the test net it brought it down. What magical (and I mean magical) reason is there that there will not be that one or more spammers who keep taking up all available accounts and space for the small network as it grows. It becomes a useless network that no new person can make an account because the spammers beat them to it and the coins rewarded are worthless since they no longer have a purpose. The coins would be worse than the scam crypto projects.
Agreed
Agreed, its one thing to pay for putting up your website and storage but it is much worse/harder to pay for it over and over again since one has to remember and its a constant drain on ones funds. Pay once is much better. One reason I will not pay subscriptions for a word processor or operating system or …
For example Bitcoin has value, not because miners are burning huge amounts of electricity, but because of the functionality Bitcoin provides. Similarly, Safecoin will have value as a cryptocurrency, not because a cost of PUTs (which is a tiny amount in fiat value anyway) but because of its functionality as a cryptocurrency.
how would it work if PUTs are free? how safecoin will be worth anything? how will the GETs be rewarded?
I tried to think a economic system like that, maybe safecoin would have value because its just more usefull than bitcoin? as its more anonymous?
edit: on how the rewards would work we could have some “taxes” on the movement of safecoin, so when someone buys safecoin from a market the network can take some of the fiat or some amount from other crypto so it can reward vaults for their contribution
Even with a cost for PUTs, farmers earn safecoins only for GETs not for PUTs. So very little change of the specification is needed to make the PUTs free.
A tricky issue is what happens when all safecoins have been farmed without recycling of coins. But that will as I see it be a tricky situation even with cost for PUTs, because the recycling of coins will only be directly proportional to how much new data users store on the network. How will that affect the overall safecoin value and the farming reward?
Apples and Planets, there is little to compare between the two as far as what is the thing creating wealth. You are suggesting not allowing safecoin to have any value at all. And don’t say transfer of wealth because bitcoin already has value and safecoin would not compete.
Sorry Anders, the network would be always FULL and rewards little because its full of SPAM and no one would even use the network with nothing of value on it. Then the coin is worthless since its not needed for anything.
I read in some thread that Safecoin balances will be stored as an integer in the user accounts. That’s super efficient for transactions of all sizes! I believe Safecoin will have a lot of value in fiat terms because of being a superior cryptocurrency. And with zero transaction fees, that will boost the power of Safecoin even more.