Why is MaidSafe even working so hard on these types of problems?


#1

All this type of discussion always gives me a thought, and I’ll make a more detailed thread on the main forum, but here’s the jist:

Why is MaidSafe even working so hard on these types of problems?

Isn’t the main goal right now to create the SAFE Network? I always wonder why MaidSafe doesn’t just focus 100% of its finite resources on that (crust vaults SafeCoin etc).

Leave it to the Authys, facebooks, reddits (/ @Seneca 's :slight_smile: ), and all the independent developers all across the world to figure out things like messaging, authentication, chatting, email etc on their own.

Just give them a secure SAFE Network to do it all on.

I kinda think that using any resources on anything besides the core SAFE Network Ave its release is a waste, personally

Although I see that self-auth is a great idea and the world should be aware, I still think that 100% focus on the main safe network is the best, most efficient way forward. Period.

Thoughts?


The future of SAFE Launcher
#2

Good Question and one answer (aspect) is

So they have something to aim for.

From my own experience they are, because they are trying to examine the future use cases and functionality. Without these the software produced today may not be worth much and the wheel reinvented to cover the final goals of the network. Like phone usage.

Its not as if the core developers are spending much time doing this exploration and is one reason why @ben is employed, to get the community (of developers) to be involved in shaping some of the future goals of the software.


#3

This is a key question and gets asked often. Think @rob summarised it well. Just to add a few small points to it

  • Not everyone in the team work in the same section of the code.

They wouldn’t be able to either. Easier way to think of it is designers/marketing/accountants aren’t going to be coding and similarly client side devs arent ideal to pickup debugging a routing invariant issue in rust. We have teams that work on different parts of the system. This will become a very valid issue if say we move people working in routing over to get this implemented/supported but thats precisely what we’re aiming to avoid and would certainly stay away from cos as you mentioned, the first and foremost priority as it stands right now is to get vaults back to users and continue those testnets to iterate the system there. Thats not a small amount of work and we’re certainly not going to make it any less important.

  • “Creating” SAFE Network isnt just about vaults.

It involves multiple parts of the system like data storage, communication, app integrations, secure consensus … If we want vaults tested and improved in iterations, then we need multiple parts of the system to progress along neatly so the tests are accurate and do not mislead the status of the system being “great” when the first client side feature brings the entire thing down. To our benefit the teams help here as people are specialised with different skills and can work in their relative areas in parallel and hopefully help achieve this objective efficiently.

As an open source dev team it makes things that much more visible if people deviate from sections they work in as Github history would very easily identify that to anyone looking at the system.


The future of SAFE Launcher
#4

Definitely agree with that line of thought, needing the network to be used in regular ways so it can be tested and optimized.

I was just thinking that if MaidSafe focused 100% of it’s finite money and people on creating the network, even at this point, then it could deliver a more finished network to everybody, and the world would start using it in the various ways, instead of MaidSafe having to bear / spend cash on both burdens.

ex. Seneca could make his PD if the network was finished in x ways, etc. Give those burdens to the people who are excited to work on them, and become 100% efficient in terms of what MaidSafe works on

And once I solidify some thoughts and suggestions further I’ll make a more descriptive topic on the main forum, just wanted to bring it up, thought it may be helpful to discuss


#5

I’ll speak my thought on this for a half second–

It’s because complete anonymity, which is what SAFE is trying to give users is ridiculously hard. Now, as for weather it should still be chased-- that is something I am unsure of.

Edit and second thought:

It should still be chased. For sure. Giving users that kind of security is irreplacable. So consider that what they’re working on is more like a fully trusted stack for computation of all types… But progress towards that can be made on many levels. And without having the full stack. Each layer adds significant value.


#6