I was simply talking of what ordinary traders (not tech traders I suppose) see. Bit coin can only supply 21 million (approx) and Safe will be supplying many times what can exist at any one time. Farmers as a whole will receive many times 4bn tokens over the life of the network. Bitcoin miners for instance can only create 21 million
I am trying to discuss things and bring up points. I am not trying to attack the ideas to wreak them, but rather explore potential issues so that the ideas can be explored further and may be what i say will point out something that needs to be looked at. Please, the defensive responses make it hard to discuss.
Calling the supply a myth under current system, is not exactly that. Looks more attacky?
I just explained what you were seeing as a myth, it consists of three components and the supply is very real. Nothing defensive about that.
Step back for a moment and see what is being said, I am not attacking but pointing things out, & discussing things. If you have not seen what i was saying then may be its better I leave it to others. Maybe also look how discussions Iāve had with David work, its a back and forth and understanding happens. Anyhow I hope your ideas work out and your baby comes to term to the benefit of the network, all the best and I honestly am supporting you as well as all the team.
Not relevant, only what is max supply at any given time is relevant.
If you burn a piece of paper and then create the same piece of paper, then you have not created 2 pieces of paper that can be used at the same time. You have just replaced a burnt paper with a new one.
1-1=0
0+1=1 not 2
To mix up circulation of supply with growth of supply is logical wrong.
Hey Iām going to make a friendly joke now (because I know how you feel about it), so donāt take offense :), but the idea is a bit communist donāt you think?
As a contractor, I donāt get paid leave, I donāt get paid for this or that happening. Iāll have to take into account that things can happen, and put funds aside for rainy days.
Thatās the market approach.
So, to start with, Iām not entirely against the idea, but I would like to poke a bit at the confident statements.
So, this situation:
when there is a lack of new users
How pervasive is it? I donāt think node operators (business people) are so sketchy and flimsy that they give up stable good returns, for some flicker on the graph.
Yeah this is a description of a scenario. Iām not ruling that scenario out, but to me, it doesnāt seem like an absolute truth.
I donāt know if that was a promise actually. Itās not in the fundamentals.
But there are in fact many things from the original design of the network, that has been tossed out.
I donāt know how you mean that I am reacting? Just discussing the tech AFAIK?
(Oh, I did make a friendly joke, but just trying to keep the discussion friendly you know )
I guess this is formally the case.
But I also think that there are some things that are implicitly agreed, and will be honored simply because itās the right thing to do.
I cannot at this point say if this is one of those things, but they do exist AFAIK.
Ok, I didnāt do that, why would I do that. I have no reason to.
It was the described system. That has nothing to do with what I think of you. I greatly appreciate your posts and ideas.
Ok, so you say.
Yeah, I donāt know about that. I think he did that to himself.
This is a very interesting nugget. If the network has no authority to mutate, I think it becomes a trustless intermediary that cannot be sybil attacked. All we are trusting it to do is store data which is trivial to verify. So while thereās a degree of trust it is never blind trust but always transparent and accountable.
To aid in some discussions on the effects of some serious cases of potential outages I did a rough spreadsheet to look at a couple of scenarios. Yes very rough estimates but its for illustration of outages.
Yes there is some negative figures because I have not put much logic in to shift the spread of replicated data that occurs after outage correctly when whole region is in outage. But the overall figures are accurate.
I am not trying to say these are likely please note this is not an agenda here, but information so informed discussions can occur.
Left hand side is the estimates of nodes and space total/used/spare and the Right hand side is effects of an outage
First is if China closes its internet to outside world. We see spare space drop from 45% to 31%. This is because the outage removes node storage which reduces spare space and used space. Then spare space is reduce again because replication occurs to restore the correct number of chunks. This means used space ends up the same after outage as before at the expense of spare space.
Now if China keeps its internet closed to outside world and the foretold west coast earth quake occurs destroying all the west coast undersea connections then expect 40% for USA and corresponding outages in other regions (smaller extent)
Now if other countries had closed their boarders along with China then the effect would be worse. Several countries might decide to close their internet for similar reason to china, like some middle east countries (EG egypt, Iran) I did not model it here due to space.
Btw, he is 3.5 years old now so not quite a baby anymore.
)
for real though. Lighten up folks, itās just a discussion at this point and everyone is entitled to there own opinion.
