Poll: Should MaidSafe implement PtP (Pay the Producer)?

I dealt with this directly below what you’re quoting.


Heh. fair enough. My suggestion is that given the options, you won’t get any content there, so the network fails be default (no farming, no rewards, no coin value).

I understand your view is that the PtP network would fail. I don’t see this yet. I’ll give a read around your deflationary economical suggestions this evening hopefully (though if you have some links lying around to get me started that would be appreciated).


Not true.

You could easily make an app and just leave it there. You don’t have to maintain it. Maybe it’s really simple and just ‘done’. Equally your PtP content might require further development. Maybe you’re writing a trilogy and you need to finance the new books. Adding books is analogous to adding a new feature set to an app.

Unless it’s an app that facilitates GETs…

Your novelist needs to eat, so would circulate coins to this end.

I’ve already outlined my rationale. Sift through it with that brain that I’ve seen in action many times before and point out my assumptions and then we can dig even deeper.

Let’s start with free markets. An easy one. And not “are free markets good”, but something a bit more specific:

In a free market, must all entities must concerned about their own welfare? Should no one should act contrary to their own benefit?


Edited the hell outta this post because I didn’t take time to think through what I was saying versus what I needed to say.

I recently attended an AMA of Eric S. Raymond’s. You know the NTP? That synchronizes the clocks on the internet? You’d think that’d be done already, but no. There’s still constant work being done (by him) on one of the most obscure, simple, solid codebases in use today.

The measure of FOSS projects are how well they are maintained and supported. So yes, it does necessarily require additional development, whereas content does not require additional anything.


The PUT Incentive model does not reward apps for PUTs - and the Network will never do such a thing. RTFM.

The application developer rewards are seen as a good start to pay creators of applications on the app popularity, measured via its use. This design incorrectly identifies the measure of use as the number of GET requests the app carries out. A better solution should be found for this measure.
Source


And my entire argument is that the Network doesn’t need that. The motivation to PUT content is external to the Network - where the motivation to farm and to develop are entirely internal to the Network.

Which I countered with a few examples… So your entire argument doesn’t hold water as far as I’m concerned.

No. Your example requires additional development. This is not a rule. Repeating the claim doesn’t make it more true.

As far as I’m aware PUT incentive model is just a suggestion. And the very thing you quote just says [quote=“smacz, post:265, topic:5805”]
A better solution should be found for this measure.
[/quote]

That does not imply that GETs requests cant be a useful part of that solution, just that they are not the whole story.

This is also to do with APP development rewards which is something separate to PtP.

You’re asking me to prove a negative? That’s low man. Remember we’re talking about successful apps that generate rewards. Successful apps need maintenance. That’s an industry fact:

Pick one.


As you pointed out, examples aren’t canonical:

Apparently examples aren’t rules. Lay some research on me and then we can really get to talking.

I wrote up a different way to do PtP here

The idea is that one could pay just the flat fee and not get payment, or they could pay more and get paid. The ratio would depend on how much more they paid compared to the flat fee.

no, the original inventor, if he sucks at marketing, will always lose out. he will upload, and tell his 10 fans, and watch as everyone with bigger networks of users capitalizes on it. indeed, people who run “channels” of curated content will always do better

2 Likes

Excuse me I don’t think the markets are that dumb. I know that personally, for the artists I support I’ll go straight to the files they uploaded as i’m sure you would or anyone else who actually cares about the work presented

Would you rather view / listen to the original copy from your favorite artist, or some random rip off (knowing that your view generates coins for them)?

Just think about it

@Erik_Aronesty:

people who run “channels” of curated content will always do better

I think you need to justify a statement like this. Many make this kind of statement based on the present, based on their experience. We all do this off course, expect things are the way they are and that they will remain so. But IMO this is lazy thinking, and unhealthy because it is self fulfilling. It took a man who doesn’t think like this to come up with a design for a totally different internet.

If you can justify it, then ok make the statement, but please don’t say things like this without having considered them and being willing to lay it all out for critique.

I say that because I don’t see why that is the case. So I’d like to hear your explanation as to why you believe it to be the case, and why you are willing, at a stroke, to rule out the possibility, all possibilities, that something new and different is possible.

We’re changing the world here, or watching a great change happening with David and his intrepid team at the centre of it, and at least cheering them in :trophy:

PS @smacz thanks for the compliment, and I appreciate your brain too, and IMO you often lay things out incredibly clearly. I do have a brain that, given time, could probably decipher more of the meaning and assumptions. But while I’m quite a good thinker, I’m slow, and time is what I don’t have much of at the moment. I’ve delved into this topic because I think it would be tremendous if we could address the problems of current production and distribution systems by providing a radical alternative. I don’t have enough time to figure out the details myself (or the brain really - but I know David values this too so watch this space in future :wink:).

I’m still hopeful we can capture this elephant! :slight_smile:

1 Like

i’m basing my experience on youtube. youtube generates revenue for producers, but producers have the right to “kick people off” of youtube. with maidsafe, there’s no way to distinguish between a producer and a copier. youtube deletes thousands of knock offs every hour, cancels thousands of accounts every day, and had to prevent “juicing” - fake views that drive up revenue and popularity. maidsafe will have all of these problems, but no central controls.

1 Like

How about filters? Because there’s no way for the network or anyone else to delete your videos doesn’t mean that I’ll have to look at it. Maybe we can pay people/companies to filter the uploads, if you want to use their filter you can subscribe to their filterlist in exchange for Safecoin for example.

sure, there can be an app that’s a “certified original” app, much like “certified organic”, that tries to create a channel of original owner-produced content, and responds to requests to take stuff down, etc. that would work… maybe. it would work better if it was integrated into the default client, and was a DAC using paid ORACLES to vett content. something like that… i’d believe in. users would just always use the whitelist by default, when searching for content. and even if you got a link to copied content, you could use the client to find the “original”, and hit that instead. indeed it would prevent the transmission of viruses, etc, since the DAC paid to curate content will help with that sort of thing as well - leaving users feeling SAFE.

It’s not about taking stuff down, just blocking cat videos for me when I’m subscribed to the no-cat filter :slight_smile:

1 Like

well, yeah, content categorization can be a feature as well. … the entire channel can be executed via something like ether with oracles that do the classification work, and data stored in SAFE.

I now get the feeling that we’re talking about different things and that’s mainly because I misinterpreted your first post :slight_smile:

1 Like

@happybeing got it. but i do like the idea of content categorization as a service. my only issue with PtP is that this classification needs to be a first-class citizen of the network… not a “nice to have”.

I don’t think your explanation justifies your uncompromising statement. Also, it isn’t clear to me what your argument is here.

Are you just saying that on YouTube, curated content always does better than none. Or that because YouTube is curated, and is a big success, therefore…

I don’t understand what you are saying, or how you think your experience indicates such certainty over SAFEnetwork.

1 Like

I don’t understand your last post either I’m afraid - I can read it two ways. PtP should or shouldn’t be baked in?

1 Like

I see PtP and curation as co-existing. There is value in curation, and it too can be rewarded, but I think existing schemes provide for that. I’d be happy for us to consider new ideas too of course.

Here I think we should stick to PtP potential benefits and flaws.

2 Likes

You know while I still think you’re daft to make this statement.

You have a point here.

I’ve been running the numbers and while yes one can argue that one’s personal wallet is still devalued the network value of safecoin doesn’t change because holders of PtD and PtP are also using safecoin and even if they hoard it the network would treat them like all hoarders, the same if some billionaire bought up millions of safecoin and drove up the price, which in turn stimulated farming up the wazoo. It would simply drop the rate of safecoin rewards for farmers until things leveled off. Rinse and repeat.

2 Likes