Store Of Value

Community
1

This is what I like about this game, other kids might agree with you and play along, I won’t for me it’s 1 nano 1 TB upload. If you pay $10 for your nodes they might give you 27 MAID to compensate, you sell those MAID to pay for your node operations. Here I think we get in the vicious cycle of devaluing SAFE, maybe it’s the worthless $10 that’s worth my 1 nano (don’t really care wouldn’t exchange SAFE for fiat). Hihi a fiat price drop, doesn’t effect the value of SAFE

I’m paying €100 per months to run my nodes, just because it’s more valuable for me to add to the Network.

I think people will be making little currency competing against AIs in the fiat economy, especially if those AI costs go to 0 (Groq Ceo).

Puts is for me inhaling, GETs is exhaling: Problem we might have is that people just don’t care about another storage solution. Well if PUTs cost 1 nano 1 TB and GETs cost 1 nano, it become more like a game to upload content…

For me everyone is competing against AIs on the Network for my 1 nano…

2

Surely you mean 1 token per 100TB? You keep talking about nanos but a nano is a billionth of a token.

At the moment each 512KB record is costing somewhere between 10-50 nanos (apart from some crazy prices I’ve seen which will hopefully go away as the network evens out.) Let’s say it’s 50 nanos. So 0.000000005 tokens per record.

That implies 200000000 512KB records can be uploaded per token. So 100TB.

But you keep saying “nano” which is confusing enough for us but will be massively confusing for other people coming in here.

It would be no good at all having a number of TB per nano because some of the time people will want to upload just a couple of MB.

At a token price of $0.433 (eMaid price just now) that implies 268TB can be uploaded to store forever for $1. That’s a pretty sweet deal.

3

When I talk about domain names, I make sure that I take a good look at it before saying a word. Same for transaction fees and in this topic storage. When it comes to storage for me free is important, because it’s my starting point before I pay for something. When Storj was offering 150GB for free a while back that was for me something to compare to the SAFE Network. Now Terabox is offering 1024GB for free, so at this moment that is my center of attention when it comes to storage.

The reason why I look at free storage is because I want to know what I should spend on the Network. For me this is free
0.000000000
This is 1 nano
0.000000001
This 1 nano is what I will pay for 1TB, I thought it was clear from the original post. I’m sure that if I ask a child to choose between paying 1.000000000 or 0.000000001 for 1TB, they would choose the latter.

No offense to you our anyone in the community, love you all for being here. The reason why I say I pay 1 nano for 1TB, is because 1TB is the new free now. Not only that, not every kid want to use the OS or the browser that comes with the PC.

That some people let a pricing algo, decide their SAFE spending :person_shrugging:

Imhco you should just pay 1 nano and be able to upload up to 1TB

For me a sweeter deal is, kids arguing @ a store with an adult saying them that their 1 nano is worthless and they fire back that that 1 nano can buy 1 NRS or 1 Txfee or 1TB for starters…

4

People will be wanting to write much less than 1TB at a time.

If 1 nano - the current minimum amount - would pay for 1TB we’ll need another 3 powers of 10 behind that so a pico so that people can write just 1MB at a time in a single transaction.

And I would dispute that 1TB is the new free. Good luck going into PCWorld and asking for your free 1TB drive! Or expecting 1TB free storage in AWS.

1TB is still a sizable amount of storage. But my main point is that people will want to write much smaller amounts in a single transaction.

3 Likes
5

You may want to pay 1 nano to store 1tb, but you won’t be able to because theres no way the price will be anywhere near that low.

I may want to pay $0.01 for a brand new Rolls Royce, but it’s not going to happen.

On the flip side, do you think many node operators will want to store around 5tb of new data for 1 nano? That’s what would be needed for the price of 1 nano per tb… there’s no way that would be scalable or sustainable… unless 1 nano was worth e.g. $300, and the market cap of the network token were around 12 million x global GDP.

1 Like
6

Would be fun to try…

The internet > telecom = dumb pipes
The SAFE Network > storage providers = :+1: drives

I’m not arguing against the MB upload size, I’m arguing against the upload price. If you upload 1MB, I upload 1TB and we both pay 1 nano, I see no problem.

I went through the node operators scenario and honestly they got nothing to complain about. Even storing 8TB of new data for 1 nano is reasonable, because it’s the free market at work. Today your 1TB is worth 1 nano, tomorrow’s hardware comes now 1 nano is 10TB. Nobody is holding you back, for now you have the option to buy Maid… Everybody with an internet connection can become a node runner, you might argue that it’s not scalable or sustainable, but how many people actually know or tried the Network? When bitcoin started it was just a few nodes.

Screenshot from 2024-09-08 15-17-57

7

Nothing is free - there are always costs that have to be paid for by someone. If they aren’t charging you for a service directly, then the product is you - they have found a way to extract value from you at your expense whether or not you are aware of it or accepting of it.

3 Likes
8

The problem is that then the price to upload 1MB will be ludicrously expensive for that amount of data. The price would be driven by the largest amount of data that can be uploaded for a nano.

Something I forgot to mention before is that probably the reason 10 nanos has been set as the floor for uploading a 512KB chunk is to maybe allow for smaller than 512KB in the future or - more likely in my view - micro transactions. There would be no sensible way to price them that people would pay if they are already able to upload 1TB for the smallest unit possible.

Blockquote
I went through the node operators scenario and honestly they got nothing to complain about. Even storing 8TB of new data for 1 nano is reasonable, because it’s the free market at work. Today your 1TB is worth 1 nano, tomorrow’s hardware comes now 1 nano is 10TB

This makes no sense because under your 1 TB for 1 nano scheme each node can only possibly earn less than 1 nano!

9

Eddy is arguing for free storage, not so much 1 nano per TB

Also there was talk of a new store cost algo coming out in the update this week

10

We should now be coding/hacking/testing super ants…

Why is @19eddyjohn75 so totally obsessed and laser focused on 1 nano? It’s pretty simple

In the SAFE universe we want to create a “stable mineral”.
1 nano = 1 NRS
1 nano = 1 Tx
1 nano = 1 TB

The reason why we need this “stable mineral” is because it creates the first level in our game of life. Some might think that there are no similarities between the physical universe in the vid and the digital SAFE universe, you couldn’t be more wrong. Just like there is an atom, there is a nano, so maybe it’s SAFE to say that these are identical systems.

Our game of life needs a first level, because this prevents us from being distracted from our real goal coding/hacking/testing/educating/having fun :kissing_heart:…

With this first level we have some attributes that makes our game of life maybe more attracted than the other simulations out there.

1 nano = 1 NRS, this is directly competing with all DNS providers and gives internet users a price comparison.
1 nano = 1 Tx, this is directly competing with the Western Unions, Moneygram, Paypal.
1 nano = 1 TB, this is directly competing with all the storage providers. Weirdest thing here would be to call ourselves SAFErs, but when it comes to saving our SAFE we stick our head in the sand to what the competition (Terabox) is doing and want to argue for node runners. I think we’ll have plenty of node runners, AI is firing most of the people out there.

I’m done y’all have a good day love you kids, now please go code, hack, test, educate and have fun :vulcan_salute:

P.s. sorry sorry I forgot to post what happens when you don’t got “stable minerals”

:crazy_face:

11

Free means you have a product that no one wants to use and that means there is a bigger problem.

12

how many nodes are your ai friends running currently? :wink:

1 Like
13

There is this collective delusion that currency needs to come into crypto for it’s price to go up and to be worth “something”, I have this individual delusion that this can be alleviated by looking @ spending cost.

This exchange 1nano for $300 is one pov, but in all honesty there is another angle.
When you look at it, you spend $2,519.99 (7326 MAID) @ Godaddy for https://davidmc0.cars (when Lambo?) and herein lies the difference you (in the stable mineral scenario) spend 1 nano* for safe://davidmc0.cars (when beam err? because somehow Scotty is not beaming us up!).

More important we need to SAFE people who are now gambling with a 160+ casino chips and are homeless. When a bum or person from a first/second/third world country can buy an NRS, 1TB and Tx cheap, than it’s really secure access for everyone.

But let’s measure, because your spending relative to my spending imhco is all that matters.
Your $10 dns (25.2 MAID) on Godaddy vs 1 nano for your NRS
The merchant receive a payment, pays $0.10 (0.252 MAID) receiving would be free on the Network, Tx would be 1 nano.
Moneygram and Western Union to some countries cost €1.99 (6.4 MAID) vs 1 nano for your Tx
If I receive 10 nano for farming, imhco that’s still a 10x from the 1 nano/1TB and i can’t tell how much was uploaded.
bitcoin’s recommended transaction fee of 2 satoshi per byte, imhco that’s still a 20x from the 1 nano for your Tx (excluding BTC/MAID price).
If I offered you 1 nano, the minimum you would be able to give me in fiat digital and physical is €0.01 (let’s not do it on the blockchain, tx costs > value transferred).
Is one product or service 1 nano a good deal? I can’t tell because if resources cost 1 nano on the Network, they’ll be something totally different to the fiat observing spender @ their end.

Until now we’ve only heard one side of the many stories, “the pricing algo” is work under construction. Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely respect what has been done, but what if it’s not the mind of a genius instead it’s a clueless consumer who knows what he wants to spend, and that is the blueprint of a economy? I can be wrong or right, but it doesn’t really matter. All that matters is that we keep experimenting and keep coming up with solutions. Measurement is now what I see as a step closer to understanding our economy in progress…

If I spend 10 nano today and tomorrow it’s 25 nano, the day after 26 nano @ some point I got to say: I’m sorry but I’m confused! If I spend 1 nano today, tomorrow or forever for me that is a more stable environment to plan ahead. It’s only when you see and maybe experience what other people go through with currency that you get a idea.

Not to create more work for the devs, but if we had a a/b test of both a fixed 1 nano for resources and price algo and people could choose, I think that would really give a better feedback on this matter…

Claude, Pi, ChatGPT, Gemini, Llama are all not running nodes, very disappointing :robot: :sweat_smile:

1 Like
14

So you propose to make the token a stablecoin? That’s crazy. You can’t set a fixed price on nanos because since it’s not a stablecoin the price will fluctuate. If the price crashes and you try to set the fixed price of TB in nanos, nobody is going to turn on nodes to lose money. Let the market set the token prices and let the farmers set the price of the resources.

3 Likes
15

I’m not proposing a ‘stablecoin’, but in stead “stablemoney”, you know the kind
that maintain it’s purchasing power?
100 years from now it’s still a hardcoded 1 nano = 1 NRS = 1 Tx = 1 Register, storage value keep going up

A stable nano it’s price can crash and if it does it’s only from the specific pov that you are looking @ it, think about it like this.

1MAID crash to $ 0.01 on a exchange this has little impact on 1 nano
Somebody bought a $10 dns (1000 MAID) that could have been 1 nano 1 NRS
Somebody just transferred €1.99 (199 MAID) that could have been 1 nano 1 Tx
Somebody bought a $6 1TB on Dropbox (600 MAID) that could have been 1 nano 1TB

All four prices above are what you spend on clearnet and could have saved if you spend 1 nano * 4 on the Network. If you look at it another time the fiat price might have changed, but the 1 nano = 1 NRS = 1 Tx etc didn’t.

I can understand that you talk about a price crash, because buy sell hodl is all we know. But things are now fundamentally different and we need to create apps.

Thx 4 the that’s crazy compliment

Btw I totally have no problem with the pricing algo, if anything it distribute wealth as it suppose too even made a millionair so :vulcan_salute:

16

I’m sorry, I can’t understand. Are you suggesting that the value of 1 nano be different for TX/NRS/TB…? Is that possible? The nano is the smallest unit of a network token, right? Or what is a nano? If the value of the token fluctuates, the value of the nano fluctuates. How can you assign a different price to a nano?

17

The idea is that you pay 1 nano for 1 NRS, 1 nano for 1TB and 1 nano for 1Tx. That means that the price that you pay on the Network for these resources don’t change. In the 1TB case over time that can become 10TB, but you are still paying 1 nano for that. The 1 nano maintain it’s purchasing power relative to the resources you can get on the Network.

If you look outside the Network, like on clearnet and the blockchain space, you might see that DNS, storage and transactions cost more than if you would be on the Network.

Let’s say that I got Tether’s USDT and I make a transaction on the Ethereum network that costs $1. Well in stead of keeping my USDT on Ethereum I would move it over to the Network. The reason is simple that $1 transaction on Ethereum today is worth 2.508371690 MAID, that is 2508371690 nano. Now why would I spend 2508371690 nano when I can spend 1 nano to send my USDT?

The thing is because I’m moving my USDT from Ethereum to cut my costs, I will also ask the person that I’m sending my USDT to, to move over to the Network where my transaction is cheaper. In this scenario, you could have two people or AIs moving over to the Network with just 1 transaction.

What is important to keep in mind, is every transaction that happens outside the Network is related to what happens on the Network.

Let’s dig deeper, for this example you can check the cost on GoDaddy.com

@davidmc0 hit the jackpot and buys https://davidmc0.cars he pays € 2.273,33 the first year.
The second year he pays € 3.608,47 for https://davidmc0.cars, the third year etc he pays again. To simplify it let count his costs for the two years, he spend € 5881.8 on clearnet.

@ today’s price € 5881.8 is 16271664707102 nanos (for simplicity’s sake let’s say the price of MAID stays the same for 2 years). If he bought safe://davidmc0.cars on the Network he would have paid just a one time 1 nano forever, he wouldn’t have to pay a renewal fee. So he spend 16271664707101 nano more or € 5881.8 more on clearnet compare to the Network.

You can imagine how many transactions happen per day, on clearnet or the blockchain. Some transactions are subscriptions and keep coming back each month/year etc.

You can spend $1 M on clearnet for a domain, by doing so, you gave someone else your $1 M just to be on clearnet. You can spend 1 nano on the Network on NRS and somebody buy that from you for 1 MAID. Eventually in life we will all make a choice where we would rather be.

I think the 1 nano payment for resources on the Network is a nice display of something that maintain it’s purchasing power. Let’s not forget that is one of the most important displays of money, with currency this will just keep going up in price.

I hope I explained it better now, so to recap the price of 1 nano is fixed for NRS, Tx and storage. Just like the Costco’s $5 rotisserie
:chicken:*

1 Like
18

I think I understand your point a bit better now. I still think there is an issue with 1TB being the smallest amount of storage that can be paid for. But my main point is that if people are going to debate this it ought to be in a new Topic because we’ve strayed away from ‘Pay once store forever’ which this one was about. I know it’s all related but this feels like a substantially different subject from the discussion that was going on before.

@moderators is there any chance of splitting out the above posts into a new Topic called something like ‘Resource and payment atomicity’?

3 Likes
19

The 21 million is hardcoded in bitcoin’s sourcecode.

Likewise we as a community should hardcode the 1 nano for NRS, Tx (altSAFE) and 1TB (this will change over time), it will give a clear signal that store of value is important to us.

If we had time it would be fun to be debating about this atomic scale matter, but in all honesty the 1 nano group had the majority vote.

Don’t really see a point to debate, we need to create apps and focus on helping people onboard to the Network, education etc…

I think of it as uploading up to 1TB, more important what do people get for this.

I went a little through the how many:

  • cars are internet enabled 200 million
  • website are online 1.13 billion (not all active) 200-300 million (active)
  • iot devices 15 billion to 18 billion (2023), by 2030 there could be between 25 billion and 30 billion

With your car you could be capturing real-time data directly to the Network

  • Reporting potholes, AI report traffic accident
  • Real-time traffic updates, congestion, and road closures etc

If you got a website on clearnet, you’ll want NRS on the Network or you’ll be E=mc²

I’ll skip iot devices, because our target should be reaching a 100 billion AIs on the Network for starters to advance humanity.

20

The TINA of fiat for value. I save up all my life for 1 hundred solid gold coins. Then Psyche16 or a mountain of gold under China is found. What are my gold coins worth then? Same as they always were equal to nothing but my delusion. You will never have a currency that is not at its heart working on fiat even if its pegged and exploited. And so it is with trying to treat storage as some kind of atom of value. It is shifting sands.