Money is a second order concern.
Utility is first order.
If it works, then it rewards.
Money is a measure of utility then and as a motivator is corrupting because in inverts that natural balance… preferring a certain interest over another. The question of who gets paid, how much for what, is a stressor… and liable to manipulation unless done in a non binding way that is just a second order to encouraging other activity. Limited pools of money can be thrown at what the owners consider is important.
Point being that as second order there is a feedback that keeps money in check. The analogy to what is broke with Western economics is strong, for the same… and the cascade from finance then to economics, politics, and society evidences the same… that feedback matters.
The question perhaps missing what gets paid and why.
Storing the data and having it available, is a service and as such should be rewarded.
Anything bound to the simple making use of utility, surely should be driven by the utility… people pay what it is worth… and don’t use it because they are being paid to!.. PtC is odd then.
Paying the content provider - PtP, if you must acronym, makes little sense for the same. Content providers are motivated wanting to get their message out. That is an important feedback for the network being effective utility and should not be paid.
What’s lacking from PtP description perhaps is what are services… so, pay the services provider is again something that finds a natural balance… provide a mechanism and users will pay what they consider the services is worth.
Then there are pay the developer PtD and promoters Pt* , which is I wonder an out of network action of gifting or rewards relative to perception and not a direct feedback loop.
If the opinion is strong and those bidding are persuasive, then indulge that where its affordable, relative to the anticipated effect - prefer force multipliers and fund in a limited way… not big splurge of money to individuals, might help limit the greed motivator… the more money the more chatter without delivery. If people want big money, they can appeal to the crowd with an ICO.
So, two classes:
One with a natural feedback loop, relative to utility.
One out of network gifting relative to perception, at risk of opinion and greed.
If you have to pay people to use it something is wrong!
So, the more contentious PtD and Pt*…
PtD is hard speculative and I wonder for the most part developers will be motivated by the prospect of a network that can support their interest and invest time and energy because they are setting up a service as application OR they may see option for a tool, that is basic and useful to all. That we maybe keen to see everything now, doesn’t suggest that it will not happen in time… and app development is done best by those not motivated by money?
Pt* is easier to wonder that promotion is relative to timing; so, a small amount goes a long way, when you have a product. Again, there’s a small company called Tesla, that it was suggested had no marketing budget. Still, when the time is ripe, low hanging fruit and other message amplifiers are worthwhile… whatever gets the message out to everyone.
Also, there’s a risk of timing. Those who do not have out interests at heart would love holders of coin to sell and suck out what value is there… that’s part of the corrupt that is taxing crypto and stifling innovation. So, consider where from the funding comes, if it’s MAID, then the time is wrong for that and only later when the market reflects a product and the inflow of interest to counterbalance spend out into P.activity.
Too long but you did title as a mega thread.
tldr; timing’s off and little need atm