Hmm… So the app can store data so that it becomes the user’s own data. And if the app disappears later on, the personal data will remain and is only owned by the user. Ok, that could work, if the economics for it works.
2 Likes
Without this ability it would much more difficult to create truly anonymous data, because the APP would always know at least the user’s ID linked to data. EG medical records.
By not having APPs facilitate data storage under the user’s own ID then the APP owner (or APP running on another computer) would have access and a layer of security/anonymity lost. But with this, the user could then safely store their medical data using an APP designed for the medical profession and in order for a doctor to access the data the user has to authorise it, otherwise there is no access to that data. (Obviously there would have to be a lot of thought put into it so family members could authorise it. Maybe the user creates a separate medical account so access could be made by other trusted people if needed.
And if the app later disappears such as deleted because the owner no longer wants to support it, will the personal data stored by the app still be accessible for the user?
As you would expect. The data would be stored in files and in the network drive when “mounted”
Now is the data useful? That depends on how the data is stored in the files.
Yes, I was wondering about the data format too. For a SAFE storage app the data would be stored as ordinary files. That would work, unless the app uses some proprietary compression technique or something like that.
Still be in a file.
Good APPs that attempt to be useful would store the data in a form that is meaningful to other APPs or generic APPs (spreadsheet, word processors, etc etc)
By proprietary I meant a format not known by other apps. In practice known compression techniques such as gzip would likely be used, and then storage apps can easily be replaced. Interesting if it will be economically possible. The cost of storing the data must be less than what the app receives from the usage of it for it to be economically viable.
FYI - I do believe that data compression will be part of the chunking at some stage.
1 Like
I have been thinking of that too! I was even about to check that or post a question about it some time ago. One drawback is that it will slow down data storage and retrieval a bit (for small file sizes), but maybe not much.
It doesn’t make much sense because data that take up a lot of space is already compressed (movies, images, etc.)
Yeah dude, once data is uploaded to SAFE it’s there from now until the end of the universe. That’s also how SAFE works
I remember reading that it’s also possible to delete files on the SAFE network. Could a storage app delete users’ files? That would be pretty scary.
Nope, not if it’s built correctly like said above, where they are uploaded with the original users ID. Once that happens nothing besides the original owner can ever ever touch them
Ok, so it would work in practice from a technical perspective, but what about the financing of the app? If I develop a storage app like that and only use it myself, would the app be able to give me a free storage quota? If not, then it wouldn’t work for several users either, because the safecoins earned by the app would be less than the cost of storing the data.
Immutable (versioned) data cannot be deleted - all versions are retained so you can roll back even if someone re-writes the file as empty.
Mutable (aka Structured) data can I think be deleted - certainly it can be wiped (but only by those with permission to modify it).
4 Likes
Money means a commodity that is highly tradable and easily divisional.
Before the American Revolution, the colonies traded tobacco as a medium of exchange which is considered “money” at the time. The American Indians used beads, and corn as a medium of exchange. As time progress, we continue to find things that are better suitable for the means of exchange. Fiat is a delusional currency and does not make any sense whatsoever. By I mean is that every trade involves weight or volume scaling system.
1oz of silver for 12oz of tobacco.
.3oz of silver for 1L of milk.
In fiat, 1 dollar equals to what? It is not backed by precious metal. What about pounds, and yen, and so forth. They all backed up by nothing. Even some fiat are backed by gold and silver, the bankers are the silver/gold whalers.
Money is evil is mistakenly wrong expression of the meaning. It should be, Fiat is evil. Money by nature incentives people to be care about service and goods. It allows exchange to be easily countable, and tradable. Badly service will net no profits and will be out of business. Standard business applies. Money holds people accountable.
Crypto-coins are considered money because of the points above.
.1btc for 1L of milk.
1safecoin for 1L of milk.
@davep With safenet, we could easily do direct bartering by using tokens. I explained it earlier with a simple concept. Let’s add little more details how we could easily do direct bartering with shipping involved.
A product comes with a token with serial number inside that can only be activated/validate once. The activation is when you purchase the item. When you purchased a milk online, the token is given to you, along with a contract. In the contract, it has two serial numbers which needs to be validated by both parties token. That piece of token is the validation of signature of the direct exchange that both parties did exchange correctly, and followed the contract as it intended. Milkman comes by with a 1L of milk. You signed with the token. Once the contract is confirmed; 1 safecoin is released from the holder, and 1L of milk is released from the holder, and completes the transaction. Contract is saved or discarded, and token is return to the owner. It can be deleted or save in case if one do want exchange that 1L of milk for 5oz of tobacco.
The token is like a barcode on the product. When it is scanned, the system records it for proof of purchase. The token is just an extra security measure for secure transaction.
2 Likes
@Grizmoblust for a different take on both fiat and myths such as gold having intrinsic value I recommend reading Martin Armstrong’s blog (read for a few days and you’ll likely soon experience a polemic about various common fallacies about money, fiat, gold etc.). Or browse back of course. He’s good IMO, particularly on money and economic realities, certainly gives a different perspective and one which seems to be more grounded than most.
I get this and think it’s a great idea to have apps that enable bartering, but my original point was that you can’t barter with the underlying network resources, such as “I’ll trade you space in my vault…”. I realize I could have been clearer.
That defeat the entire purpose of safe network. One would know those certain type of data belongs to one user and therefore making anonymous useless. And it will incentive becoming centralization, and would bring back server type model.
Safe already has an solution for distributing data, privately or shared.
In Bitcoin the coins are generated out of “thin air”. The same can be done in the SAFE network.
Farmers can be rewarded with safecoins, similar to how miners are rewarded bitcoins. And the SAFE data storage can still be free for users.
Actually both private and public SAFE data storage can be made totally free for all users.
Then some people may think: what about someone grabbing petabytes of SAFE storage and making a cloud service like Dropbox or Google Drive? And then sell that cloud storage to customers for real money? My answer to that is: would a customer pay for that service or would they use the SAFE network directly for free? The answer is of course that the business model would fail, because any price for the cloud storage would be higher than the free storage on the SAFE network directly.
And, if users have to pay to store data on the SAFE network, then competing decentralized networks can offer free data storage and outcompete SAFE.
So, the choice is to either make SAFE free, or be beaten by another network that is free.