Quote from: stuartcharles on April 24, 2014, 09:05:36 AM

Quote from: liondani on April 24, 2014, 08:28:45 AM

Quote from: stuartcharles on April 24, 2014, 07:35:59 AM
Surly the demand comes from people wanting to use more computer power than they have, and that supply is met by thous with extra computer power selling there spare capacity. The medium of exchange is safecoin?

To my mind its impossible to know if they have a good economic model until we see what people do with the system, will people demand more power than they have (price goes up) or will there be more power than people demand (price goes down).

What could be done with all that processing power? unimaginably virtual worlds? Extremely cheap laptops where you pay purely for what processing power bandwidth you use.

What a great time it is to be alive and see all this unfold and evolve

If they implement bytemaster's advice:
3) charge* users any time they consume more than they produce

* I think it's obvious they must charge safecoins...

how else would it work if you didn't charge users for using resources? If they didn't put that in the white paper it must have been a case of not needing to state the obvious?.... i hope!

The idea of having a token cryptocurrency attached to the system is a fairly recent one, which is why it's not very fleshed out at the moment and not in the whitepaper. In the hangout they did introducing the idea of having a Maidsafe token, the lead developer briefly says that the tokens could be used to pay for extra storage space.

So I guess the first use case will be for users who would like extra storage space, users like myself who currently pay ~2$ a month for Google Drive. We'll see once they actually launch their product.

One thing I don't like though is what bytemaster said about the coin not being divisible. This is not good for transactions, as an appreciation in the coin value would probably have to be taken into account by scaling the service offered rather than the price for the service, which seems a bit more complicated but not impossible. At time t1 you get 10gb/1year for 1 Safecoin, at a later time t2 you'll get 20gb/year for 1 Safecoin as their value somehow doubled, instead of now paying 0.5 Safecoins for the same service. Does that make sense? Maybe having so many coins this will never really be a problem, and 1 Safecoin will never be worth enough for something to cost less than 1..

Quote from: stuartcharles on April 24, 2014, 09:05:36 AM
how else would it work if you didn't charge users for using resources? If they didn't put that in the white paper it must have been a case of not needing to state the obvious?.... i hope!

I hope too! But we live in a crazy world...

Quote from: liondani on April 24, 2014, 08:28:45 AM

Quote from: stuartcharles on April 24, 2014, 07:35:59 AM
Surly the demand comes from people wanting to use more computer power than they have, and that supply is met by thous with extra computer power selling there spare capacity. The medium of exchange is safecoin?

To my mind its impossible to know if they have a good economic model until we see what people do with the system, will people demand more power than they have (price goes up) or will there be more power than people demand (price goes down).

What could be done with all that processing power? unimaginably virtual worlds? Extremely cheap laptops where you pay purely for what processing power bandwidth you use.

What a great time it is to be alive and see all this unfold and evolve

If they implement bytemaster's advice:
3) charge* users any time they consume more than they produce

* I think it's obvious they must charge safecoins...

how else would it work if you didn't charge users for using resources? If they didn't put that in the white paper it must have been a case of not needing to state the obvious?.... i hope!

Quote from: stuartcharles on April 24, 2014, 07:35:59 AM
Surly the demand comes from people wanting to use more computer power than they have, and that supply is met by thous with extra computer power selling there spare capacity. The medium of exchange is safecoin?

To my mind its impossible to know if they have a good economic model until we see what people do with the system, will people demand more power than they have (price goes up) or will there be more power than people demand (price goes down).

What could be done with all that processing power? unimaginably virtual worlds? Extremely cheap laptops where you pay purely for what processing power bandwidth you use.

What a great time it is to be alive and see all this unfold and evolve

If they implement bytemaster's advice:
3) charge* users any time they consume more than they produce

* I think it's obvious they must charge safecoins...

Surly the demand comes from people wanting to use more computer power than they have, and that supply is met by thous with extra computer power selling there spare capacity. The medium of exchange is safecoin?

To my mind its impossible to know if they have a good economic model until we see what people do with the system, will people demand more power than they have (price goes up) or will there be more power than people demand (price goes down).

What could be done with all that processing power? unimaginably virtual worlds? Extremely cheap laptops where you pay purely for what processing power bandwidth you use.

What a great time it is to be alive and see all this unfold and evolve

It would make no difference, that doesn't have anything to do with what we were discussing... initial distribution does not significantly affect deman

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Yeah or maybe at the expense of an Angelshare airdrop :)

Quote from: kyletorpey on April 23, 2014, 11:17:20 PM
So what happens when someone forks Safecoin with an initial coin distribution based on the current distribution of bitcoins?

Or based on the current distribution of PTS... wink wink... ;)

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

So what happens when someone forks Safecoin with an initial coin distribution based on the current distribution of bitcoins?

Quote from: AdamBLevine on April 23, 2014, 07:24:41 PM

Quote from: Stan on April 23, 2014, 06:59:32 PM

Quotes from: AdamBLevine on Today at 05:57:24 PM

Quote...I'm a little curious what great insight you have Daniel?

Quotelaunch something before you take the time to gloat about other peoples success.

Set him up, then smack him down.  Nice.

the schadenfreude was going on way before I showed up, he was not defining it just saying that he would help them fix, and of course flatly saying that nobody understands economics.

Sorry guys, I spend about 5% the time on your project I used to so I don't have time to respond to everything.  I just wish you would work instead of talking about everybody elses failings when you are so unable to deal with your own.

"I just wish you would work instead of talking about everybody elses failings" Im sure something similar is going through a lot of heads as they read this string but lets not forget that you have to be fiercely competitive to win and that is all you are seeing here, bring it on chaps!

Quote from: AdamBLevine on April 23, 2014, 07:24:41 PM

Quote from: Stan on April 23, 2014, 06:59:32 PM

Quotes from: AdamBLevine on Today at 05:57:24 PM

Quote...I'm a little curious what great insight you have Daniel?

Quotelaunch something before you take the time to gloat about other peoples success.

Set him up, then smack him down.  Nice.

the schadenfreude was going on way before I showed up, he was not defining it just saying that he would help them fix, and of course flatly saying that nobody understands economics.

Sorry guys, I spend about 5% the time on your project I used to so I don't have time to respond to everything.  I just wish you would work instead of talking about everybody elses failings when you are so unable to deal with your own.

On a sidenote:

Your presence has a positive influence on troop morale, and, apart from that, discussions like these make it worth to browse these boards. Do stick around.

back to work

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on April 23, 2014, 08:15:34 PM

Quote from: bytemaster on April 23, 2014, 06:19:32 PM
To improve upon their system I would:
1) eliminate inflation all together and power the network by better unit of account
2) move the responsibility for load balancing and replication to local nodes
3) charge users any time they consume more than they produce

You said MaidSafe will consulting with you, is it still relevant?

yes, but we have to get our products done first...

Quote from: bytemaster on April 23, 2014, 06:19:32 PM
To improve upon their system I would:
1) eliminate inflation all together and power the network by better unit of account
2) move the responsibility for load balancing and replication to local nodes
3) charge users any time they consume more than they produce

You said MaidSafe will consulting with you, is it still relevant?

Quote from: liondani on April 23, 2014, 07:35:37 PM

Quote from: bytemaster on April 23, 2014, 06:19:32 PM

To improve upon their system I would:
1) eliminate inflation all together and power the network by better unit of account
2) move the responsibility for load balancing and replication to local nodes
3) charge users any time they consume more than they produce

Hope David Irvine will read your advices...
since I am also invested on maidsafe project  :-[

+5% agreed, a worthy project and advice from BM.

It would be great to see a BitShares/MaidSafe collaboration downstream, kudos to all involved.