pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @didiplaywell 18h \ parent \ on: Proof of Humanity: Certifying Human-Originated Content in an AI Internet AI
But that's exactly what I'm saying. Cost is implied. One way or the other. You're validating my take there, just burying it deep down the argument.
It's fundamentally different. Proof of Stake applies to emission-based protocols (that's why stacking is possible in them), so things can be paid for at no cost out of interests. If you pay with, say, bitcoin, there's work implied in one way or another (to mine it or to buy it), which is what gives bitcoin its worth.
That's not pay-to-post, it's earned reach by gathering patrons, it's demonstrate value by getting paid.
Pay-to-post is pay for influence, and influence generates income. Its proof of stake when scaled up.
reply
That's not pay-to-post
As I said, then cost is implied one way or another. There's people paying per post, directly or indirectly.
Pay-to-post is pay for influence
In no way, otherwise we would all be famous here in SN. It's like saying that paying the fee for your bitcoin transaction makes you rich.
Its proof of stake when scaled up
It's like saying that the fee scheme of bitcoin is proof of stake.
reply
No it's the opposite, fundamental distinction. The future is paid-to-post (proof of work), not pay-to-post (proof of stake). Its a distinction as basic and obvious as the distinction between a pro gamer and a pay-to-win game.
SN is just a basic rudimentary version of pay-to-post, like social media back in the innocent days, you have to carry things to their limit, imagine what they'd be like as the dominant paradigm.
Pay-to-post necessarily amplifies the content of the people who can afford to pay more rather than the content people want, the best content within a domain, topic, space, or discipline.
reply
pay-to-post (proof of stake)
That's a fundamentally flawed comparison, as explained, so the argument do not makes sense.
Pay-to-post necessarily amplifies the content of the people who can afford to pay more
The exact same can be said about people who is paid to post, as they can afford more time to do it, amplifying their content. That's why it's all about costs at the end, be it directly or indirectly.
reply
Ok I think you're just trying to win a debate instead of thinking objectively. Systems and incentives are complex. KISS doesn't apply even if you'd like it to.
Although it's very simple that being paid and paying are not the same thing, not sure why you can't wrap your head around that.
reply