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

10% of what if not of the farming reward?

Farming reward does not change if PtP pay address is there or not. It is a reward in addition to farming rewards.

The calculation dynamics is expected to result in any PtP reward being about 10% in value of the farming reward.

2 Likes

10% higher upload prices. The network pays the farmers as much as necessary to get the capacity it requires. In the end the network income and outcome must be in equilibrium (or else we couldn’t maintain the 2^32 SafeCoin cap), so the only option is higher upload prices. In practice this will mean that the uploaders of not-so-popular or private content will pay the rewards for the uploaders of popular content.

1 Like

Thanks to everyone who has voted so far and hoping that plenty of other forum members will vote (soon).

I think there are a lot of good points raised in opposition of this which is a little bum for me. I like the idea of something to draw in content creators just like the app devs and this in a novel approach. I agree with when you view something to learn more about but do not support (but PtP rewards them) that is frustrating. Perhaps it could be gamed to an exrent but the maidsafe crew know all about preventing such things as shown with the design of this network.

I personally would be content with a donation button and watermarking ability.
The upload cost would only bite you on private data to an extent also because if you’re providing public data for consumption some if not more of your cost to upload would be returned in PtP model. To me the model is saying hey the vaults holding the data of popular content AND the producer of that content will be paid based on popularity! And not inflationarily as popular content is cached and caches don’t get paid! Maybe more here are looking from the perspective of a dev and not a musician?

1 Like

Wouldn’t that just be more honest? Propaganda is already quantified by views that count as a sort of social capital, its the same with news, even watching with disagreement means you are a supporter, like it or not.

Had not thought of that. Society would not be as advanced in science & medicine if the unpopular views had not been considered (viewed) and had a measure of support.

Have you considered that groups would simply copy the content (changing it so dedup doesn’t occur) and allow “researchers” to view it without supporting ISIS. ISIS gets one views worth only.

1 Like

Thanks to everyone who has voted so far and hoping that plenty of other forum members will vote (soon)

2 Likes

Would be good to have more members of the community vote.

Have your say.

@dirvine and the devs are taking into account what the community says and feels about this issue.

Also it has created a fair amount of thought in to how creators/producers can be rewarded and/or paid. Plenty of thought has gone into the pros & cons of various ideas including the original concept.

1 Like

@neo, would you (or anyone in the community for that matter) know the origin of this idea? (specifically for the network itself to reward content)

Yes it was David @dirvine as far as I know.

3 Likes

This is an untenable idea.

Economic structures are only valid for scarce things. Since any given digital data can be copied and varied (down to the single bit) endlessly, economics is the wrong model and will simply create perverse incentives as many have already laid out in this thread.

Instead, kickstarting, donations, patronage, etc. are the proper models to use. Since these are elective (rather than protocol-determined), they must not be built into the core codebase.

This principle probably applies to software too, as it is also a form of data. In fact, the built-in dev reward may create an overwhelming incentive to fork MaidSafe & create a FreeSafe, where only truly scarce resources like physical storage & bandwidth require economic activity.

Incidentally, this is part of the secret to Bitcoin’s success: its limited supply is directly tied to real-world scarce resources: the electricity, time, hardware, and labor required for mining.

8 Likes

Why make it that complicated? Let people watermark their content with a payment request and give users the chance to cancel it.

This doesn’t haveto be done by the network. You can have apps doing it. I don’t see why the network should get into the mess of auto rewards.

3 Likes

So let’s put this in perspective. Say you watch a leftists TV news station and then watch a right wing tv station so you get a balanced perspective on whatever issue. Does that mean you SUPPORT either perspective? No. It just means you are trying to get info. But I agree that we already “support” things just by visiting websites and viewing other media. Every time we go on youtube and view videos we’re showing support as these views are recorded in the stats.

I would argue that one has to discount any amount of “support” that is aquired via views/downloads or other consumption to people who do not nessesarily endorse the product but rather are just trying to find out about the product. This is not unique to maidsafe regardless of ptp. It’s all across the web. Any time payment is based on consumption then endorsement cannot truly be seperated from inquiry. The difference is are you there to learn or are you obsessing there every day?

1 Like

I see it as support that the article/view was put up, without any indication of “endorsement” or “support for that position”

What a dull world if it only contained what I endorsed.

3 Likes

That being the case, would you then say that there needs to be a distinction made by the user regarding their support for the content? And that without this input (a “dumb” system) this system is faulty?

maybe the “like” system could help there.

If tipping was able to be made an API function then security can be maintained and easy for implementing in any APP or native disk app.

1 Like

That would require the watermark concept on public data. Is that the evolution of this PtP idea? The way to introduce the human element to the concept of PtP?

PtP original concept required the Pay addresses stored in the meta data which is what “watermarking” is in the context of SAFE.

This is the idea that seems to be concerning many people and if it can be done easily and not having to jump through hoops then many more people would support PtP. And doing it as a API function then any app can use it for tipping too while keeping the pay address anon (some would still want anon tipping of their content)

Then maybe also have the API be able to control the original model of PtP so only what the user approves of gets a chance of the PtP reward attempt. Thus adverts and other undesirable content is not even given the network incentive

3 Likes

While I am growing more and more supportive of a hardcoded tipping address in public data, (and corresponding API) I am still not sure that PtP needs to utilize the network’s resources to provide the reward. Thank you for all of your numerous responses to this topic though.

3 Likes