Final few points about PtP

I was thinking about it again last night and came up with some really clear points about it that I felt really strongly about.

  1. SAFE doesn’t make sense without PtP of some sort. The incumbents (YouTube, imgur, reddit, Flickr, etc etc) are all free (no $$) and SAFE won’t be. As a content producer, it would make NO sense to PAY to upload my work to SAFE without getting payment incentives back. I’d just put on YouTube for free, and get my following that way. Let’s be better than the current system, not one step worse.

  2. producers are important!! THEY are the ones whose SafeCoin creates the whole entire SafeCoin ecosystem; without them paying to upload content, there is no coin to pay farmers!! Then the whole system collapses.

I know us community members have squabbled about PtP with no physical progress for ages it seems, but please recognize these final points in argument, because I think they’re extremely important to all our investment, and our future.

Privacy, Security, Freedom!

4 Likes

Any potential incentives should be implemented at the APP level, not the network level.

If you’re talking about public data only, then that’s not true. Without public content, the network can function just fine as one big decentralized dropbox.

There have been some generalities that I’ve seen agreed on:

  1. This should be done on a per-app basis.
  2. Walletmarking (@dyamanaka - it’s a thing now) is a good way to facilitate payments to the creator - and can be used however an APP can figure out how to use them.
  3. Content has a different value for everyone, therefore human input is most likely going to be necessary to determine the rewards that any given content will recieve. “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.

All-in-all it’s been quite an intense, but productive, series of discussions.

9 Likes

I agree. “Safetube” will grow way faster when people can make money on their clips etc.

This is not true as @smacz already showed. When you PUT data to the network, you’re forced to “burn” some Safecoin. So the address-space of that Safecoin will be free again for others to farm. But even if PUT’s where totally free, Farmers could still Farm Safecoin. You deliver a Chunk, the network will choose a random Safecoin-address and when there’s no ownership, the Safecoin could be yours.

7 Likes

Yes, it has. I guess it’s my turn to be on the fence.

Situation #1
On the one hand, I like APP Builders having freedom to pull a “producers walletmark” address, assuming it’s provided by the Network by default. They can provide a way to LIKE, TIP, BUY, SHARE, SUBSCRIBE etc.

Situation #2
On the other hand, I feel APP Builders that do not provide the “producers walletmark” or worse, replace it with their “APP walletmark” have a golden opportunity to aggregate and resell content. This already happens today.

I hope people will support the original producers, and “choose” to use APPS that show the producers walletmark address. But they need the ability to know the difference. At the very least, a GET request also shows the walletmark address in the SAFE Launcher.

If the Client (SAFE Launcher) pulls the walletmark, we can mitigate situation #2. That is why I was pushing to have it on a Network level. APPS should not get paid for the content they aggregate but for their own merits same as content. If Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, and especially Ebay were APPS on SAFE, why wouldn’t they intercept the revenue stream?

One of the main goals of PtP was to remove the middleman. If I was an APP Builder, I would be very tempted to have people pay the APP (ME) first, then pay producers at my own discretion. This paradigm has been going on for a long time, and maybe it will continue regardless…

I just thought we could usher in a better way.

5 Likes

Exactly.

I think we need at least some type of solution in this area, even if it is very small

3 Likes

If we leave it to app makers we’ll just have another Apple taking 30%. I think water marking should be implemented. Implementation is important but I leave it to irvines vision, he is far more capable than i

3 Likes

Yes it’s very concerning that everyone’s just supporting arguments to not use math and logic, and instead just give up, throw our hands up, and give all control for producer rewards to the app makers.

F@$K that, please let’s put our thinking caps on and create a very different paradigm.

…or at least be open to it! That’s the first step

3 Likes

but the problem really is … how much reward is “the right amount” … and the amount appropriate for every content is very different … (e.g. 1MB of your app/music would be worth way more than 1GB high-res-picture of @smacz right eye-brow :open_mouth: …) … very difficult to make an algorithm that doesn’t have an unwanted effect …

(don’t get me wrong im 200% pro ptp … the only problem is … i don’t see how to implement it the right way at the moment …)

ps: and if you make it per file … your 1 MB would be worth way more than 10000x the 0.1KB dump-files of @smacz which he uploaded + left links to a “unbelievable porn video” at many different forums …

pps: as i see it the only way possible would be a rating system :open_mouth: … so maybe voting pro/contra some public adress … and depending on this rating a ptp-reward would be granted

2 Likes

I wonder what is the opinion of actual professional artist about all proposals. It would be interesting to hear the view of someone who already makes a living selling his contents.

5 Likes

According to @dirvine they are desperately in favor of it. I just think we are hitting roadblocks regarding implementation…

Pay on GETS
Pay on LIKES
Pay on TIPS
Pay on PRICE
Pay on SUBSCRIPTION
Pay on USAGE

6 Likes

Why “reward” anybody anything? Would we expect the current Internet to reward,incentivise or subsidize Facebook, Google etc or their users?
Donate buttons, tipping etc would seem to be the way forward really. :smiley:

5 Likes

Yeah, I’m pretty sure too, but which of these is more likely to make them consider distributing their work on Safe is the question I would ask them.

That’s a good question,

I would like @we_advance to chime in as he talks to a lot of them.


If I was a producer, I would want the option to do everything.

Upload with my “walletmark” and have the option to set…

  1. BUY upfront to GET my content.
  2. TIPS appreciated.
  3. LIKES appreciated, the Network gives me bonus SC for more LIKES.
  4. SUBSCRIPTION required to GET my content.

The point is the producer sets the terms, not the middleman or the aggregator.


A minimum solution would be to have the walletmark address at the Network Level, and GET requests show the address in the SAFE Launcher.

From that point 3rd party APPS could design any kind of payment/reward model (LIKES, TIPS, BUY, SUBSCRIBE, SHARE, etc…)

Now, the end-user knows who they are paying/rewarding regardless of the APP they are using.

2 Likes

great topic for tomorrow SATURDAY 14TH NOVEMBER - ANTS vi - meet up Open invite LIFE IS PEOPLE - ANTS vi - meet up SATURDAY 14TH NOVEMBER

LIFE IS PEOPLE - ANTS meet up will be live link up with - SAFEnetwork Decentralization and Cryptocurrency meet up in Ruidoso New mexico USA

**SATURDAY 14TH NOVEMBER 17 HRS MST 16 HRS PT 22 HRS GMT **
This meeting is open to all - feel free to post any topics of you would like to discuss - will post the LIFE IS PEOPLE ANTS vi hangout link later

Proposed topics for discussion

Keys under the doormat. SAFEnetwork is safe secure etc but point of weakness = password to connect to SAFEnetwork

Meritocracy and the SAFEnetwork

Will post the link to hangout on Saturday

ANTS meet up in various time zones
SATURDAY 14TH 17 HRS MST
SATURDAY 14TH 16 HRS PT
SATURDAY 14TH 19 HRS ART
SATURDAY 14TH 22 HRS GMT
SUNDAY 15TH NOVEMBER 0900 HRS AEDT

Feel free to raise any topics to discuss
contact @optictopic for details of location in Ruidoso


@Al_Kafir

1 Like

One of the many things that inspires me as an artist regarding the SAFEnetwork is ability unleash human potential for more regarding n99 - https://3d8bf14b7f2bb73ad4b697e2ddfdfb783c7dcbd9-www.googledrive.com/host/0B8X-yQWyMNcIU21GYjVTYVZuTjA/n99/index.html
https://weadvancelivefree.wordpress.com/2015/06/21/n99-the-non­technical-white-paper/

Lol but what do you think about what he said, @we_advance

1 Like

An issue with this is someone who produces art for showing on safesites. If a safesite had 20 of these on a page then the user is expected to keep track of 20 addresses. What method to pay for them (its not an APP but browser plugin)? This is one reason the pay on get by the network was introduced, As a way to change the current economic (middleman etc) model, a way to pay producers without requiring users to do additional things. To ensure the producers got at least something for their efforts and cost of uploading the art.

2 Likes

That’s the crucial point. I don’t think people havr to present a full fledged equation, but so far I have seen 0 solutions how payment is handled. (in terms of what and where’s the payment cealing). Saying.that it is calculated dynamically is simply not enough.

For farmers, rewards can be measured in actual work for sustaining the network. Content does not sustain the network technically - if it is good it may sustain the network’s prestige, but how ist that measured? And how is a voting system (which I, like @riddim, see as the only solution) prevented from exploits? Idea have been presented that afford users to pay per like - how is the payment been calculated autonomously (since the network is agnostic to the real world value of its currency)? Without proper answers to these questions I don’t see any way how this discussion makes any progress.

2 Likes

RE: Walletmarks

This is a big topic to be discussed further, and my idea thereof was an immutable (in every sense of the word) piece of metadata that pointed to a wallet where a viewer may contribute to the content creator directly. This is why it must be implemented at the network level, although PtP must not be.

P.S. I have opened a new thread to discuss the implementation of APPs rewarding content here.

P.P.S. One like wasn’t enough for @Artiscience’s post above. You hit the nail on the head.

2 Likes

Expect… no. But it would be a better internet if they did. And we can aim for better :smiley:.

2 Likes