pull down to refresh

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.
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