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?
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.
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.
I posted something about exactly this (categorization / search as a first-class citizen) earlier today.
And why would you want to do this?
To get this reaction from you actually
Yes, and this is the reason why I think that if the producers get paid, the viewers should be the one paying. There’s no easier way to solve this.
I just proposed a different way where producers / uploaders could pay more than the mandatory PUT cost to get a share from the views, but “normal” (minimum fee) uploaders would not.
Nope. Didn’t ask anything. Just pointing out that you’re speaking in absolutes. Which may be handy for making your point seem true, but that’s not the real world.
You’re talking about that. And implying that. I’m saying success !== a need for maintenance. It may encourage maintenance. But it’s not necessary.
Similarly to the example of literature. If people enjoy it, then the creator will be encouraged to invest more time in it. There’s no need to arbitrarily draw lines in the sand around an idea of what an app is.
And if they are creating something that people like, then brilliant. What more could you want?
Curation will become simple lists that because of dedup will reference the original work so the original creator will be rewarded even if you have a collection of vids/songs.
All i’m saying is that the facilities and features that make curation easy and integrated have to happen for PtP to be feasible. Safe network must present a default configuration that enables things like virus warnings and content-blacklists. Maybe boostrapping off of x.509 certification as well (which is has central authority issues, but is generally accepted as a bridge between virtual and fiat identities). In general, curation and content classification needs to be baked in. That way we won’t have to worry about
- PtP being exploited by people to copy original content. Too easy to do, and impossible to tell which is the original (indeed forgers could post before the creator, and could be better funded for promotion!)
- Safenet being treated the way Bittorrent is today: a protocol that many ISP’s block outright
- Safenet being shunned by content creators because of rampant forging
Any good solution to this problem is going to be messy. It will not resemble a nice curve. It will look more like a web of trust. What we can do is trust that users will prefer to pay the original producer… if it’s easy to identify who is who. And quality producers will provide things like x.509 certs to prove who they are even though an in-network web of trust might be a better solution.
Artists will have verified SAFEtwitter / etc (some sort of verified profile online) and will make sure people know which file is theirs if there’s confusion
I agree, artists will try to do that. Integrating something like “keybase.io” might allow users to make that choice more easily. Again, if you don’t make it easy, and part of the default client… people just won’t care enough to do it. I have seen no evidence in my life that people will go out of their way to ensure the right people get paid for internet content. Does anyone look at a porn video and think: gee I hope that girl is getting paid for this viewership, rather than some middleman who stole the content. Let me check her SAFEtwitter / etc feed to be sure.
You need it to be built into the system: This content appears to be a replica of a signed original, would you like to view the original content and reward the original producer? Make it easy, and 99% of the people will do the right thing.
Not only that… but copyright holders will recognize that the best way to get paid… is to upload content. This content appears to be a copyright violation, but there is no original available to view, do you still want to download it? Most users will just skip that warning.
Going further, if you allow producers to set prices… well then. Now it gets interesting: This content appears to be a replica of a signed original, would you like to view the original content, for a fee of $0.20 USD?
A fee market like this… for content, and built in to the system would change everything. Because now all content, of any kind, is instantly monetizable via MAID, and producers can set reasonable prices for content and users can choose, themselves, to risk violating laws while being informed of reasonable alternatives.
@Erik_Aronesty I agree that those features you describe are useful and I want to see them, but I don’t accept they are essential for PtP to be an improvement over the status quo, nor that they should in effect be mandatory. I certainly want people to build those features in a decentralised way, and for people have the option to use them, but I don’t see it as practical to bake them into PtP.
I’m not ruling it out, I just don’t think it is going to happen because I think it will be technically hard, potentially in conflict with the fundamental aims of SAFEnetwork (e.g lack of censorship and decentralised control), and it will be even more difficult to agree than PtP itself. To dispel those views I’d like to see a this fleshed out into a proposal of what and how (on another topic).
Isn’t (the above) essentially just tipping?
If she has a good fan base then I’m sure the answer is yes.
Creating and fostering a following of people will become more and more important for artists on SAFE
Safenet should be a network and distribution service only. Sites that pay producers for songs etc can be created by users rather than somehow be incorporated in the system. Besides, just because you give 10% of something of a song in safecoins to producers that means nothing in the real world and I highly doubt it will be appreciated because its still illegal.
In the future when safecoins are worth more real money you are also much more likely to be sued because suddenly there are money to be made out of content and producers will want more of it and demand it to be on their terms because its their content, why only 10%? I want 100%! If Safenet is only a network then at least they can say, hey sorry we are only a network and have no control of where the value goes.
How do they plan to file suit against a decentralized network? They can’t sue maidsafe the company as it doesn’t control the software or what people do with it. Nor can producers sue the users as they don’t know who they are or who is downloading what. How do you file suit if you can’t lock your target?
SAFE is already a lot more than that, it is a world wide database (DHT)
SAFEcoin is already an addition to a network and distribution
Websites on SAFE are an addition to the network and distribution
And so on
Who is “you” the opensource github repo? There is no owner to sue.
Also the 10% is not payment for the content so the network owns it, but rather a reward to encourage uploading of quality content. No wage, just some of the creators costs of production. As an incentive.
The farming reward is simply an incentive for farmers to contribute their spare resource, not a wage or such thing.
What you claim is really nonsensical
Thats the thing, if you start paying out money to people then that entity that is paying out money obviously has some sort of control in the network. If they can pay out 10% why cant they pay out 20% or 100%?
If you do not have any such function PtP in the network then what you say is entirely true.
I read about pornstars being paid etc but yea I very well may have misunderstood what this PtP is. You are saying its the uploader that is being rewarded and not the producer.