A Social Network That Costs 10¢ to Post
yours.org
yours.org
Because I am this weirdo, I can't help being astounded at the level of comfortability people have in ecosystems like the ones Facebook and Google have cultivated. These are really creepy and dystopian models at their core. And they are not helping your damn social life! Believe me, people don't mind being in touch and coordinating through more direct means, in fact most people respond more genuinely to it.
So this is awesome right? Here's something proposing a fresh new model. Except nothing in this article/pitch addresses my concerns/issues with current social media. Like, as a paying member, are they aggregating "marketing" data on me? Are they going to try to follow me around the web and ID me with tracking scripts and under the table data trades with other players? Will they organize my data and sell it on as an "anonymized" individual profile ("Emperor {username}, we bring you new clothes. This is a magical anonymization cloak, making you invisible to any unsavory entities we sell your data to").
In fact, now I have even more questions/concerns! For example:
1) can toxic or just plain wrong information simply be brute-forced to the top with money (or digital tulips or whatever)?
2) how is this not just buying popularity and influence in a contrived environment?
3) do they cap the value of a post / vote or is this susceptible to weird bubbles?
4) if you do break the rules, do you pay to get out of trouble?
This whole thing sounds like someone's been spending a long time getting investors on board and now can't seem to remember what the pitch to the consumers originally was.
You're not alone. This is a key driver to the popularity of messaging apps, in particular group chats.
usecases = ["group events", "messaging", "staying in touch with people", "networking", "checking in once a month", &c()];
singleUsecase = pickWhatevs(usecases);
otherStuff = pickNotWhatevs(singleUsecase, usecases);
responseStr = "Well, I only use it for " + singleCase + ". I rarely use it for " + otherStuff + "."
As a former employee you might have more insight than I do, but how exactly has a glorified message board which doesn't charge its users become one of the richest companies in the world?
Sure they're a bit interested in the fruit growing hobby and that network, but they're also very interested in the ways you "hardly use the site" and they're even more interested in the things your doing when you don't even know they're still watching you. Even more interesting, you're actions on and off their platform can be correlated with heavy users of the site to infer traits they'll assign to you and sell on, true or not.
At the end of the day, the way the species is evolving with the internet, giving someone permission to follow you around the web and collect that data on you is the same as giving them insights into your inner psyche, the majority of what composes your reality, and the things you value most in your life, among other things.
These are things we should have a right to offer explicitly, not implicitly surrender.
[edits to elaborate on a couple points and add helpers to the why I use FB excuse]
Because, as you just demonstrated with your programming example: For HIM it's a glorified message board. Other people may use it in completely different ways and appreciate it for them.
I'm not the greatest facebook-fan either, but I think you're really overstating the control they have over people's lives here and at the same time understating the value it can provide to people. Unless of course all people using facebook are just damn idiots and don't know what they're getting themselves into!
EDIT: 'control over people's lives' might be better phrased as 'knowledge about their activities/preferences'
I invite you to read (or preferably watch) your Ibsen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Enemy_of_the_People
And people will accept it because we're pragmatic. And those who don't just need to grow up and start pleasing the AI.
A whole new industry will pop up from the ones training nets in the first place. Hey do this and that and our calculations will read you better, you'll get the results you want. We just suggest you don't talk about these things at all, don't shop at these stores, don't have this name or be associated with that demographic ...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-23/google-wi...
Though I'm guessing that they are only now okay giving up on email data because they have so many other sources of tracking your behavior.
That's the annoying thing. We already had message boards! Except they were decentralized, you could register anonymously and the administrators often had more autonomy (e.g. not put up ads and tracking scripts). Now Facebook has eaten a bunch of that market, and so we're forced to choose between giving up those communities or submitting to the Borg. It's annoying as hell.
For what I see on Facebook or social network is : - look at me - post without arguing or even answer, discussion. - look at me - stalking - quote about life - game - cat meme
0% construction, information is not well organize, scrolling..
How do you know if you haven't even used them? Facebook is completely instrumental to my social life and I'm very happy with it. Also, what do you mean with "more direct means"? Is Facebook Messenger not direct enough?
The quote from me is probably too strongly worded on my part, but I really don't see the added value. You may have made it instrumental to your social life, but my personal opinion is the price is too high. Unfortunately, when the majority of people choose to pay the price, it switches from being a personal choice to being an expected exchange. This is fundamentally about the right to privacy and it's not something a rational person would trade away for something that can (and has been!) achieved without the terrible price tag.
Usually if something provides a high value, like a car, you invest in it so you can see the returns. My qualm is not with the messaging service per say (I take more issue with the mass posts people make about their kids or others without consent, I believe that's wrong and cheapens inter-personal relationships). I mean, you have to realize they take your keyups, they know when you've reworded before sending and they're tying what you might think of as a personal conversation to the valuable profile you're consciously helping them build and capitalize on.
I've been around a lot of people using messenger. I've found using the phone or email somewhat increases the likelihood of something tangible happening (general follow through) as well as thoughtfulness of the replies I receive. Obviously that's anecdotal and the jury's still out. I guess my question is, how can you assert Facebook would help someone's social life?
I'm not debating your happiness with it. I'm just a little surprised your so comfortable using it.
More direct means would include chatting in person, the proverbial snail mail (you got to admit, receiving a letter from someone you respect/love/h[oh]ld dear is great), phone call or text message. Except for the last one, each one contains a ton more social queues than a chat group.
I'm simply raising privacy concerns I have and I believe it affects us all. I was disappointed this model did not address it. Invasion of privacy, profiling and tracking are big issues in my opinion and I would be curious to know why you don't think they are worth mentioning.
I do think phone calls, and spoken word in general, are highly effective. You are not helping yourself socially by refusing to speak to people who are calling you and if none of your friends or loved ones call you, there is likely a problem (I don't know your exact circumstances). I also think it's a fair claim that people are much more likely to value a hand-written letter over a chat forum message. You are offering something tangible!
I'm just proposing alternatives to socialization on a platform like FB which really is, I think, hurting natural and more effective means of communication and self presentation. I'm not saying there isn't a good place and use for internet chatting and what-not, those are great social tools too.
Just to repeat, my main point is I don't think we should have our social lives commoditized. I do not think we should be profiled and tracked across the internet. I see this ending very badly. That's all.
> Invasion of privacy, profiling and tracking are big issues in my opinion and I would be curious to know why you don't think they are worth mentioning.
The thing is that they can do it. It's like saying people shouldn't listen to other people conversation in public. Sure it's "wrong" to do it, but you do know it may and will happen. The web is public, I'm not the only one that can your comment here and that's true for Facebook too.
I know what I post on the web, I know what I do on the web and I all consider them the same way I would do ANYTHING in public. I wouldn't share nude picture of me in a mall, at least if I were, I would be pretty sure that it's done in a relatively private means.
> I think, hurting natural and more effective means of communication and self presentation.
How can you declare it's more effective? I can organize events in a central place, way quicker and keep much more people involved in it that in any of the ways you talk about. You may be able to argue that it's not the most private, but that's not why I use Facebook.
> I see this ending very badly.
The good old slippery slope argument. I'm curious, what's the bad ending that you imagine?
I usually like to use this counter-argument over that one: Hitler didn't ever need social media to kill that many jews...
It's easy to manipulate people to hurt their community and go against what it's good for them. All you need is to control their fears. The funny thing your privacy fears is probably just as easy to manipulate. That's maybe what needs to be fixed, way more than anything else, though I would say that teaching people to be conscient of their actions and their impact is even better.
Plus, there's something tangible about a letter that gives it so much more charm. Of course, if I need to make plans or need to get a response promptly, I'll most likely use Facebook.
facebook itself is a different beast, aside from the event planning stuff it's pretty much just a bunch of "look at what people you vaguely know are doing" for me
I use the feed to keep track of artists and stuff like that, like when they post a new song. Other than that, not much.
Exactly this. FB is spying on me and selling this info to the highest bidder. Are you (yours.org)?
First of all, I use Facebook in a similar way (dedicated email, sandboxed browser, external tracking disabled (I know it still tracks me internally), not entirely my real name, no mobile apps, all paranoia privacy settings on, don't really share anything). And I only signed up there a year or two ago. But Facebook absolutely helped my social (and even professional) life. Even if I can reach people by other means, it doesn't change the fact that they prefer to keep in touch with Messenger, we have our private group chats there. Facebook lets me keep up with cultural (art/music) events, and also local dev meetups. I have my current relationship thanks to Facebook as well (I met her in real life first, but we only started to hang out because I looked her up and added her on Facebook and we started chatting there). I even got my dream dev job accidentally, because of a Facebook share by an acquaintance. Buy/sell groups also got me a lot of good deals, including my current apartment.
That doesn't change the fact that, as a company, ethically, strategically etc. I despise Facebook. I hate their manipulative practices. Most of the information shared there is pure shit (but I can more or less choose not to follow it). Regardless, by not being there I'd be losing more than gaining.
Now, LinkedIn I detest even more, thanks to the unsolicited invites from strangers that I get to my private email, even though I haven't even registered there, and I have no intention of doing so.
It's 2017. Between aggregators, dedicated sites, instant notifications, apps, Calendar sync et all, we probably have 1000 more ways than every decade in the 20th century to keep up with cultural events and local dev meetups.
I don't think 60s', 70s and 80s culture and art events (and event goers) suffered because they didn't have Facebook to tell them... if anything, from concerts to art exhibition the scene was even more vibrant!
I understand that things happened before 21st century, obviously, there's still posters, word of mouth, newsletters (in some cases, but they're not that popular over here), but these days, at least where I live, event organizers are using Facebook as a core platform to spread awareness. I certainly didn't know about a lot of these events before I joined Facebook.
And there's events like bike rides, hiking trips etc. organized by individuals... on Facebook.
Yes, that's part of the problem. That's part of why so many people prefer to have one way of keeping up, and choose Facebook for it by default because that's what "everyone else" uses.
But if Facebook was around in the 60s, there would be no 60s -- the spirit I mean.
I stopped getting spam email from LinkedIn after I set up an account (which I never use).
FWIW, some do. The only reason I signed up for Facebook was to have an asynchronous medium in which people can "contact" me, instead of trying to meet up, call my phone, text me, etc. I use Google+ for sharing photos/updates with my family while I travel, and LinkedIn for recruiter fishing. I use each of the above at least a few times a week, but always out of necessity; I've set a pretty solid standard of "I may take a couple weeks to respond, but I'll always respond" which is so much nicer than being constantly interrupted by people reaching out through direct means.
Email was nice for this originally, but there's way less friction to contacting someone through FB than there is through email, and keeping social messages out of email keeps my inbox more manageable for productive uses without having to set up and maintain filters.
Of course, YMMV. But just remember not everyone likes/minds the same things. :)
I feel like you are from an older generation, not that there's anything wrong with it, but you probably no longer have the same needs as the younger generation. When I organize stuff, I don't always do it between 1 or 2 people. Once we were a dozen that went to an Escape Room, even more people were interested and even more were invited. It was barely organized days before. Sure it works coordinating through more direct means and people did that for a pretty long time, I feel like you had to when you had similar needs, but the thing is, there's a better tool for it nowadays which is Facebook. It's like saying you don't want to use the all good new framework because of the good old way that worked.
Also, it's partially true, people do mind being in direct touch, we had some people that just disappear from our events (and some of them came back using a pseudonym later on) because of that reason. It's a central way to put everything if something goes bad, this is where it's updated if anything changes. Again, it's like saying you don't need a bug tracker because you can easily do it using emails. Yeah, it works, but it tiresome to do it that way.
I personally don't care much about this tracking. It tracks mostly what I give it. I know what it does and I work with it. I'm not afraid of personalized offer, it's all good, offer me a new laptop for a great price, I would be happy to take a look and buy it if it does fit my criteria and my needs.
I don't want Facebook to know that I'm interested in software engineering? Well, maybe that was dumb to tell it in the first place (and in that case, I would use more private means to follow that passion).
I spend 0.0 hours per week on facebook, and 0.25 hours per week coordinating activities directly.
How much time do you spend on facebook?
> Each vote costs 10¢ and the payment is distributed amongst earlier voters.
This sort of pyramidal scheme actually gives people a monetary incentive to try to vote how others will vote, regardless of their actual opinion. Like other gambling, it may be a good business model, but it serves to exacerbate the groupthink problem.
2) no we didn't; steemit is entirely unmoderated.
> It costs 10¢ to post a comment and the money goes to the original author. Our users enjoy paying the original creator to post a nice comment next to their work.
Which would seem to discourage discourage diversity of discussion since profits go to the OP.
In my opinion, Minds has a much more interesting compensation model: you can directly send money to creators (feature called Wire) either generally or on a specific post. There is also an internal points system where you are compensated by interactions with your content. If you have enough points, they have a real monetary value.
Also, as an added bonus, the website and apps are open source, and actually function quite well. It overall has a Facebook sort of feel in terms of feature set; but with a model that seems less exploitative and more collaborative.
And points for hourly check ins? Modals reminding me to install apps when reading posts (got one when trying to read the terms of service, too)? In fact, you apparently can't visit the groups link without getting the pop up. I just want to try your damn site. Ugh. 18 MBs of content on load? Don't do that to the web.
Despite it's own limitations, Yours is lot, lot cleaner.
Compare: http://www.scientology.org/ (is that the same font in the header?)
After some more searching around, it's like the same audience repeated across all of these sites ("alt right" and cryptocurrency obsessed). Stefan Molyneux one of the main users of minds and also one of the first users of Yours? You guys are setting yourselves up for failure if you don't diversify your audience quick.
https://steemit.com/@stefan.molyneux
https://www.minds.com/StefanMolyneux
https://www.yours.org/profile/b32fd24245734d632b5f3ee35a2b85...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux#Cult_accusatio...
Here's the third most followed user, "truth":
Complete with
"Antifa victim, Kiara Robles, speaks out about political violence in Berkeley."
"Hillary Clinton blames everyone from James Comey to Bernie Sanders for her blistering defeat to Donald Trump"
"Why Did World Trade Center Building 7 Fall? New Study Claims Gov’t Story Is False"
I hear r/conspiracy is nice this time of year, but there's not Bitcoin to be made if that gets big, yeah?
Dtube (distributed Youtube) is see it for yourself. People are complaining about alt-right and conservative refugees being the early adopters of any distributed/decentralized/free speech platform:
https://www.reddit.com/r/dtube/comments/6zlza1/please_dont_m...
https://www.minds.com/Timcast [Independent journalist who frequently embeds himself in mild to hot political protests and is fairly careful with his words]
https://www.minds.com/Styxhexenhammer [Occult author, political/general commentator, plus some more light content]
https://www.minds.com/cafeinacoli [Graphic artist]
Propaganda, tribalism, and Ben Shapiro in Berkeley
The Alt-Left double standard.
What is bit coin and can you still make money by investing?
Here's the second user:
Pewdiepie did nothing wrong. Anyone acting offended is probably lying through their teeth.
The people who know/care about Shapiro are conservative, same goes for those defending a guy who makes jokes about Jews and uses the n-word.
Your third user just happens to "retweet" the first. It's a very small and focused community there. Also from the last user:
BREAKING: Now is your chance to become a founding investor of Minds. We are taking the idea of a people-powered global network to the next level. Invest now before we reach our goal!
That explains the evangelism?
Which he left. Tell me what you mean by "people like Bannon" - people the left don't like? Guilt by association?
Why? Perhaps we should read the article first?
I have nothing against the site, it's an interesting concept. But having to read about whatever recent bitcoin drama is going on to understand its hard forks and implications (BCC is a hard fork, right?), setup and manage a new wallet, take appropriate security precautions, etc, just to manage my site balance is a lot more burdensome than asking for ten cents to comment.
Note that our app has a built-in Bitcoin Cash wallet, but it works well enough that you don't necessarily realize you are using crypto :)
If not Coinbase there are a number of other providers we can use. For global adoption, we will ultimately partner with many third parties simultaneously for this service.
Edit: nevermind, I didn't know yours.org had shapeshift integrated.
you could create an account, post content, get paid, and technically pay for things by "cashing out" of "yours" to the receiving address for the thing you're trying to buy.
of course, there'll be a point where you DO want to load your account to be able to view content. That's likely in the long term when there are more users and higher quality content.
Anyway, all of luck to them. I'd like to know what might develop from this.
Though they really should have asked for two cents instead of ten. I mean, come on: how could you miss this?
I think people like to write things that others will read. How else to explain why people post so much on e.g. Facebook that is not informational or helpful to others but merely something they want others to read? Introspectively, I recognize that I enjoy commenting on Hacker News and am not exactly doing it wholly out of the goodness of my heart for the benefit of all of you.
"Shitposting" in it's strictest sense is very much an example of the latter, because it's a repeated pattern of stupid behavior which doesn't even qualify as joking, and which is repeated regardless of whether people pay attention to it or not. It's like drawing swastikas on bathroom stalls.
We're very focused on creating money-earning opportunities for our users. Every time you pay you should either get some thing out of it or have an opportunity to earn money.
For creators, if you write something worth paying, you can easily generate more than the 10¢ it costs to post. If you charge 10¢, you only need one payment to earn your money back :)
Based on perceived value, I think that the fee for posting should be negative (it costs to post), but with a small amount recouped based on use (some combination of number of views, number of comments, etc.). Beyond a certain threshold of viewers, the posting would have a net positive cost (you get paid for popular posts).
I have not given much thought to how that could be gamed.
> Though they really should have asked for two cents instead of ten.
I absolutely agree.
Anyone who's active in virtual worlds knows people love to buy content and tip creators and performers.
>Why didn’t micropayments ever take off? No one ever tried.
Except virtual worlds, which have whole economies based on micropayments.
Apparently $10-20K tips happen quite often:
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/231p6e/sum...
So yeah, if you're entertaining enough, people will throw money at you.
Which was a well known fact since the beginning of strip clubs... Twitch and co are no different from sexcams.
Once you get past the fact that they are both livestreams the similarity ends. Twitch explicitly forbids sexual content [0]. There are some streamers that dress suggestively, but they're in the minority.
Your statement is not much different from calling YouTube no different from PornHub.
Neat concept (and good domain), but your top post has $2.28. The entire site has 20 new posts ($2?) over the last 24 hours. You don't gotta exaggerate to sell, it just makes me less inclined to trust you and your service.
Seems to be competing roughly with Steem. These services have a problem where the initial adopters are Bitcoin users or fanatical unpopular views (voat), which biases and ruins the community early. Interested to see if this avoids it.
Also, does anyone know what kind of regulatory upkeep a project like this requires? If a site like this operates with multiple currencies, it's essentially an exchange and probably has to register as such (they've outsourced this). However, if it just keeps user balances (not really a bank, but similar), does it have to register with any particular authorities?
edit: your site allows a blank password, the title is "Yours | undefined" on profile pages and the menu controls to the left of the message input are very unintuitive. How do they work? Also, the profile ids are from hell:
/90b5a6c4bfb6530398c8c5aa27e2b60e3a4611ddb2184c366b7d3ad41f0e9f16/
Don't men to be too picky, it's just very rough around the edges.
> Also, does anyone know what kind of regulatory upkeep a project like this requires? If a site like this operates with multiple currencies, it's essentially an exchange and probably has to register as such (they've outsourced this). However, if it just keeps user balances (not really a bank, but similar), does it have to register with any particular authorities?
We have discussed with lawyers and are sure to stay inside the law. Because all payments are p2p and we are not a custodian, the regulatory burden for us is a lot lower than many other similar projects.
> edit: your site allows a blank password, the title is "Yours | undefined" on profile pages and the menu controls to the left of the message input are very unintuitive. How do they work? Also, the profile ids are from hell:
Will fix soon. These things are already on our issues list :)
The main benefit is that no real currency is ever involved, which reduces a lot of administrative overhead.
A 2017 Hashcash was actually implemented recently and published at http://hashcash.com/ Bad news is that it requires something to store the value, so this requires bitcoin as the token transferred via hashcash.
What you have described in your post doesn't actually work that way in the real world -- You cant set a global proof of work value (bitcoin difficulty adjustment) or able to build a proof of work that would allow a phone or desktop to hash -- it will be eaten alive by spam farms with ASICs (bitcoin mining asic farms).
That quote caught my attention. Is this kind of gambling or being a day trader? I like the mechanic that unearthing good content gets rewarded -- was that the goal? Have you found this system subject to gaming or collusion (a few people posting and upvoting content to increase the odds of getting a payout)? Do you see less clickbait getting upvoted than, say, on fb? What's the incentive for later readers to upvote an already popular title?
Pretty cool that you taken such a different approach. Wish you the best! I'm pretty much burned out on all social media, but will check it out regardless.
edit: Big question what's your vig or house cut on all the money changing hands?
2nd edit: I see the answer to my last question: you keep $0.10 from from each post and credit yourself as the "first voter on every post". So you get the largest cut of the cost of the upvotes on each post?
The vote model encourages hotness. If you want to earn money, you are encouraged to vote quickly. We will have alternate models to encourage different things soon. The next step in rating content will be something we call reviews. After purchasing content, you will be asked: "was this content worth paying for? yes/no". We believe the information we get from that will be a very good measure of quality.
> Pretty cool that you taken such a different approach. Wish you the best! I'm pretty much burned out on all social media, but will check it out regardless.
Thank you very much!
> edit: Big question what's your vig or house cut on all the money changing hands?
Currently our revenue comes from two places: The 10¢ it costs to post content and getting the first vote on all pieces of content.
> 2nd edit: I see the answer to my last question: you keep $0.10 from from each post and credit yourself as the "first voter on every post". So you get the largest cut of the cost of the upvotes on each post?
Yes. This is something we will change soon, probably by either giving the creator the first vote and then charging 20% of all votes or by giving the creator the second vote. It's important that Yours Inc. gets some of the money to prevent infinite self-upvotes. We had that problem originally.
1) How many total and active users do you currently have?
2) Where are they coming from?
3) Why would they pay to participate in a new social network when there are so many available that are free?
4) Why Bitcoin Cash?
Thanks!
About 2800 total and 1000 daily sessions.
2) Where are they coming from?
Predominantly social media.
3) Why would they pay to participate in a new social network when there are so many available that are free?
Because we encourage high quality. They believe in our mission and our content quality is rapidly improving.
4) Why Bitcoin Cash?
Low fees. See this article: https://www.yours.org/content/a5c9a2549cfd9e48607e0aebe233d2...
How about nested comments?
Looks great so far. Good luck.
For example, and someone did mention it in the comments below, if I write a script to analyze the kind of content that gets most votes and simply bet on those to maximize the cash earned. Then this will introduce a perpetual loop of content.
A little longer than that, perhaps. http://transcopyright.org/hcoinRemarks-D28.html
Is the payout to early voters greater than 10 cents? And do voters know when they're an early voter? If so, maybe this is why it's such a popular activity!
You know you are an earlier voter by looking at the amount voted. That is the amount below the vote button.
It's a Twitter clone that stores usernames, follows and posts in EthereumVM. Transactions are optimised for costs, right now it's around 0.01USD to follow/post
I think those users meant "it will never work at scale".
Seeing that yours is a totally obscure social network -- it might be OK for a small niche.
Heck, The Well charges for belonging to a discussion group.
I look forward to seeing how it goes, and I'm always glad that people are getting out and doing the experiments that they find compelling.
But it's very dangerous to confuse novelty with utility. As examples, consider the 90s wave of VR. Or the many waves of 3D photos/movies/TV. Early try-it-out interest among technophiles is proof of novelty, not long-term utility. And especially these days, social networks are, like the human relationships they channel, long-term propositions.
The fundamental problem I see is that it kind-of 'corrupts' gratification. When I make a post, or do a vote, or write a comment, I dont want to think about the monetary value of it. There is 'value' inherent in creating/sharing interesting content and thats all I want to think about.
Adding money to the mix makes it a distraction from a 'pure' experience and takes away value than adding it. Ads do something similar - but imo ads are less distracting than putting a monetary value on an upvote.
Still this is very interesting experiment. Would love to follow updates on hn.
I am just adding high quality content because I think I'm better off directly charging for my content rather than going the ads-route. I hate ads. I (and probably everybody else on this platform) sees as the greates-valued addon in his browser the ad-blocker.
I will run a few tests, see if people are willing to pay for high quality content.
I don't see this as my facebook-replacement. Facebook is fun, to watch cute little videos while enjoying my "extra privacy" during the day. Facebook isn't for high quality content. Facebook isn't good anymore for staying in touch with friends (for me) - Facebook messenger yes, but the Facebook wall - no.
I also don't think that "yours" will be the next Facebook. I see it as direct payments channel for independent high-quality content creators. Something like steem, just more straight forward for me. I like the concept and I'll see if it works for me.
Maybe if the likes only got you store credit up to what you've put in but never for profit? If profit from likes was possible, we'd end up with tons of posts karma whores go for.
We will allow subcommunities soon which will allow moderators to pick the cost to post. Low-income countries can use a very low value denominated in their local currency appropriate for those users.
>You can earn money by voting on good content. Each vote costs 10¢ and the payment is distributed evenly between all earlier voters. Yours Inc. always makes the first vote. You can vote on something as many times as you'd like. You will earn money if you vote on something popular early, because you will get money from all votes after you.[1]
Innovation could occur on top of what is a very simple data model and doesn't need the free market to stay relevant.
Our public institutions are what we make of them. If we despise and distrust them they will wither and die. If we encourage and support them they will flourish and we will all prosper together.
No man is an island!
I find Yours simple and easy to use apart from the friction of getting ahold of some Bitcoin Cash.
Also, on the friction of Bitcoin Cash, note that we currently have a Shapeshift integration allowing you to cash in with any crypt, and will support credit card onboarding soon. We think most users won't even know they are using crypto :)
Using bitcoin cash is another positive in my books, since it costs < $0.01 per transaction, versus $7~ per transaction on Bitcoin legacy.
a malleable tx cryptocurrency that cannot support Hash Time Lock Contracts safely (thus LN and proper microtx's) is the legacy...
- How Bitcoin will see massive adoption – it might surprise you.
- Still Don't Get Bitcoin? Here's an Explanation Even a Five-Year-Old Will Understand
I know reading would only cost $0.10 (or even less) which is not a life affecting amount, but I don't like the idea of that 'test' being seen as some sort of endorsement that I can't revoke.
no results.
I guess they independently came up with similar notions. Good luck with their initiative. Because I really hope there can be viable alternatives to advertising revenue for online content.
After they have their conferences where all the rich people support them, they give the content away to the masses for free. The point to take away from this is that some people are willing to pay a huge amount of money for "networking".
Difficult balancing act.
An alternative was proposed, if you want to spend more ;) :
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14761633
Courtesy of the Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170713150307/https://medium.co...
https://web.archive.org/web/20170903044028/https://affluentc...
Wouldn't something like lightning network microtx's be better than Bcash?