From thinking on how we can know the network is robust; I wondered there might be a relatively simple solution, to providing confidence against any network that might still be untested or unstable.
I’ve not seen similar suggested but expect it might have been considered; so, won’t overthink it just yet…
I wonder if a user had a local-SAFE with a copy of their data, then regardless of how the network performs, their data is secure.
Having SAFE provide a secure local envelope, that stores a copy of the users data, could solve two problems in one:
- some users will always want a local copy of their own data
- counterbalance for any uncertainty about how the current network will perform
and such an approach would give users a sense of control, over what might appear as uncertainty - the ‘new’.
In the case that network is volatile, then user could have a simple one button option to reupload their data… at zero cost. That seems like a simple idea, which might serve well for marketing against any suggestion of risk on an unproven network.
Also, perhaps this would allow devs to play rough and resolve where the real limits are, using alsorts of different methods, without worrying about real loss of data.
Count it perhaps as a failsafe for all time; at no point can any data that a user has noted as important, ever be lost; it might just become inaccessible, until they push button for a free upload.
So, steps to this I wondered would be:
- data sent to network
- brought back and validated, so it’s known the network has a copy
- put securely into a local cache that is always readable to the user but is only added to where the network acknowledged the PUT cost was paid
So, like a goldfish bowl, the user can see their data is SAFE-locally and then they can also play rough with a network that they might wonder has not been proven… making a lot more use of it and sooner than they otherwise might do, for the worry about the real risks of volatility.
I would suggest an option that if a user or app considers data can be lost, then it can choose to opt-out but otherwise everything is erm… made-safe by default.
The only real limit then might be that safecoin, could not adopt the same… or perhaps there could be some wangle, to assure all users…
Maybe this would also lend itself to seeing real metrics of how much data was lost - the local-SAFE could run a test and report that all was well?