I prefer a currency being based on trust in people than in a government. Bitcoins value comes from trust in other bitcoiners. And the more bitcoin gets into the normal economy the more stable it will become. Which means bitcoin being a world currency would make it practically impossible that the bitcoin value crashes. It would all be one and there would no relation that could make it crash.

I have generated most of my wallets through brainwallet.org.But the address that got hacked was the only that I used to create a transaction via brainwallet.I don't remember my passphrase since I was just smashing my keyboard writing random characters for about 10-15 seconds it must have been at least 50(though I think it was more than 100) random nonsense characters.I then just copy the addresses and private keys to a notepad and forget the passphrase forever.I am almost sure it has to do nothing with the passphrase.

Massive world wide exchange hacks, every exchange and online wallet provider.
People loose interest and move on, no transaction = no fees, miners pull out, blockchain stops.
Most crypto investers wiill just move to another coin i think.

Saying this i still don't think bitcoin will die anytime soon.

safecoin lost my interest at the bit where it said no bloat because safecoin confess its own storage...
in short.. they are just a upload website with a gimmicky way of having users access data to pretend to be decentralized..
its like saying to users its decentralized because all the users download a torrent program.. but all the seeds are on safecoins servers...
much like etherium and nxt are centralized coin holders pretending to be proper decentralized blockchains..
when will the world of the 1990's centralized mysql database lovers, ever learn..

i dont even understand why this is being blatently advertised on bitcoin/blockchain based forums.. when it has nothing to do with it

i dont know what company but if steam accepted bitcoins it would surely make a lot of people life easier and also it would have a positive effect on bitcoin price

Comparison to other technologies

Difference between Freenet and Maidsafe

https://www.reddit.com/r/maidsafe/comments/273lj2/difference_between_freenet_and_maidsafe/

The SAFE Network differs from many of the organisations and products in the space because it offers the decentralized Internet at the core of it's design. Some of these projects are currently trying to add components that bend them into the shape of a decentralized Internet, but this is not what they were designed for. As a result, many of these projects require significant set up and only work on certain platforms. It is worth noting that MaidSafe, and it's community, supports any project that backs a decentralized Internet, however we don't see any with the same goals as the SAFE Network: Privacy, Security and Freedom for everyone!
Bitcoin vs Safecoin

    David Irvine explains.. "User Defined data" of a SafeCoin can hold a file/directory (no blockchain bloat issues cos SafeCoin confess with its own storage, accessible to everyone, free, all the time - nothing to pre-download as in bitcoin-QT).

Safecoin can be used for anything, such as bets, shares, trades, smart contracts etc." ----> SAFE is bitcoin/Ethereum on steroids!

Safecoin are held differently to immutable data chunks (to be documented):

    "Coins are held as group data and maintained by that group, so not distributed like immutable chunks, but managed more like structured_data_versions." ~ David Irvine

Safecoin Differentiators

Safecoin is a secure decentralised currency secured by cryptography and a decentralised network, with similar characteristics, but wholly different technology.

    Secure (safecoin is at least as secure as bitcoin. For example, the famous bitcoin "51% attack", would require at least 75%, and even then have only limited vulnerability.)
    Truly Anonymous (no blockchain--only anonymous IDs are recorded, and only the current and immediately preceding owners' IDs are retained.)
    Massively Scalable (Instant or near-instant transactions, regardless of transaction volume--no blockchain bottleneck.)
    Accessible (Anyone with a computing device can obtain safecoin simply by joining the network and farming by sharing bandwidth and disk space with the network, whereas this was only feasible with bitcoin during the early days and now a small number specialised "miners" earn almost all the bitcoin available. On the SAFE Network, farming capability will remain much more evenly distributed even as the network matures and farming rates decline. See @fergish's post).

These factors have very significant implications for the widespread adoption, application and longevity of safecoin as opposed to other cryptocurrencies which are, in the case of bitcoin and other blockchain based currencies, for example, severely hamstrung by deficiencies in several of the above areas.

source
Ethereum vs SAFE

Architecturally, Ethereum and the SAFE Network are quite different. Ethereum is based on a blockchain that features a turing complete scripting language, while the SAFE Network has no blockchain at all but achieves consensus within close groups. As for the applications that can be built on top of each system, it's too early to say. Ethereum is primarily envisioned for the writing of smart contracts while SAFE has the potential to replace the entire internet.

https://forum.safenetwork.io/t/how-does-ethereum-compare-to-maidsafe/456

Storj vs SAFE

The goal of Storj to provide a decentralized solution for users to store data and uses a blockchain-based approach to achieve this. While the storing of data is also a very basic goal for the SAFE Network, its scope is much larger. The SAFE Network is a fully decentralized data and communications platform upon which every existing service of the internet can be built. Furthermore, the SAFE Network will offer advanced features such as distributed computation in time.

https://forum.safenetwork.io/t/how-does-ethereum-compare-to-maidsafe/456

Bitcloud vs SAFE

https://www.reddit.com/r/maidsafe/comments/257vz5/maidsafe_vs_bitcloud/

Tor vs SAFE

Tor is a routing layer that is built on top of the current internet. It works by routing traffic through a relay of nodes, thereby concealing its origin. While Tor can offer anonymity, it comes at the cost of decreased performance. One problem inherent to Tor is that the exit nodes remove the last layer of encryption and therefore are able to read the traffic. Governments can maintain a large number of exit nodes and thereby read some of the traffic. Furthermore, successful attacks on the Tor network have been reported [citation needed]. There is no built-in reward mechanism to incentivize individuals to run nodes, hence their number is still rather small.

The SAFE Network is designed from the ground up to provide strong anonymity by default and does not suffer from any of the weaknesses of the Tor network. Successful attacks on the SAFE Network would require the attacker to gain control over very large percentage of vaults. Even then, the damage an attacker could possibly do is very limited.

https://www.reddit.com/r/maidsafe/comments/2bnbeo/will_maidsafe_be_a_network_with_some_properties/

As long as you close it correctly, it will pick off where it left off when you open the program again.

I didn't hear about it until now, but on the other hand did hear a lot about alternative to that service from Kim dotcom, which in the end will
probably leave it for the history books, since everyone who likes the idea of decentralised internet will most likely end up using Kim's version
because it is the one with most exposure.

cheers

try to acquire it instead, via signature or mining if your electricity is not expensive, it's also a much better way then simply buying, more anonimity for you

He's got some weird ideas. His ongoing idea that schoolkids will each have their own currency has me scratching my head somewhat.

I'd say the blocksize thing is probably the least trivial issue out there. I can see why they're playing it so safe but they're not inspiring outside observers. I'm sure no one wants it to be that way but any alt that did supersede BTC would have the exact same issue.

If an alt did pop up I'd want to see years and years of solidity before even dreaming of putting my trust into it. A fork is nothing when the coin's whole purpose is playtime on Cryptsy. It becomes serious shit if there's actual commerce involved.

A lot of features can happen with layers. The integrity of the blockchain will always be paramount.

In his presentations Antonopoulos said frequently that bitcoiners shouldn't worry about competition from altcoins because if an altcoin get some useful feature that gives its competitive advantage over bitcoin, bitcoin developers would just copy&paste this feature to the bitcoin code. It did make sense at the time.

However, I suspect that those times have gone. The whole agony of block size limit change shows that bitcoin code and bitcoin development infrastructure have already hardened and solidified to the point where any change, even as trivial, as block size limit, becomes difficult on the border of impossible. From now on we can assume that bitcoin code cannot be changed in any substantial way. No non-trivial feature, however important or competitive, cannot be added/modified anymore. Which means, chances of an altcoin replacing bitcoin becomes much more real. Which is bad news for everybody who invested in bitcoin heavily (financially, career-wise etc).

It's not trolling, I'm really concerned and I'll be happy if you can prove me wrong.