Not sure of demand, but since there were no major objections from the first set of folks to glance at these summaries, here are parts 3 and 4. That’s all for a while.
**TL;DR - SafeCoin Divisibility Notes : Part 3 (~2016)
On creating SAFE alt-coins
Summary: seneca described a means for creating utility coins on top of the SAFE network that was applicable to Project Decorum. The method introduces a type of distributed “mining” system where users directly create the alt-coin by proof of work according to predefined settings introduced by the alt-coin’s originator and the natural properties of SD objects.
Highlighted Pros
Will SafeCoin Be Divisible?
Summary: General discussion on the benefits of divisibility and different schemes to achieve it. neo suggested limiting coin divisibility to 64 bits of fixed point precision, and mentioned how a 4bit ‘nibble’ mask can be used to convert from binary divisibility to decimal divisibility. There was also some confusion about whether 1SC would be allowed to purchase a fixed amount of storage or variable storage, as well as a description of using an SD (deprecated?) to handle subcoin wallet balances. The use of the “SAFE GB” PUT ledger was also mentioned by dyamanaka.
Highlighted Cons
Highlighted Pros
Most Wanted and Unwanted Features
Summary: betterthantrav mentioned his desire for the network to provide incentives to users to delete data. neo responded with a description of how if PUT balance was used to handle safecoin divisibility, an internal “stock market” effect could lead to network instabilities.
Idea for divisible Safecoins
Summary: polpolrene proposed a credit system where a safecoin is frozen, and then 1SC credit is given to the owner to spend decimal fractions of as they see fit based on discussions previously had on the forum with regard to safecoin economics and PUT balance. Nimos also proposed multiple dominations like 1 SafeCoin = 100 SafeCent. mav highlighted the fact that: “4.3B safecoins was decided as a compromise between the convenience of having lots of units vs the computational cost to the network when transferring lots of coins.” neo described how “Divisibility has then to be able to provide a lot of divisibility without multiplying the transaction load” and also mentioned that problems with transaction load can be mitigated by controlling the degree of safecoin divisibility based on network size. The discussion then continued with regards to algorithms that the network would need in order to know when a new degree of divisibility should be increased, and whether or not divisibility should be linked to fiat values. Erwin asked about simply increasing the number of coins by moving the decimal place and neo described the problem with doing this here.
Highlighted Cons
Highlighted Pros