pull down to refresh
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @phaedrus 21 Mar 2022 \ on: Is “Value for Value” fatally flawed? bitcoin
What exactly is Adam complaining about Fountain? Ie. how does it currently work vs how should it work?
the issue stems from a distinction between tlv record "lightning comments" which are very limited and hacky direct messages to podcasts (like youtube superchats) and the general comment system based on activity pub (mastadon-like). fountain is moving forward with lightning based comments while other platforms are looking for a more general commenting system separate from lightning payments.
it is all the usual "cordial" fighting that occurs with any protocol development while trying to solve a real problem of decentralized commenting and paid messages.
reply
The general activity-based comment system afaict is stuck at the familiar impasse of "it'd be great to have this idealized thing" and "this is so complicated we'll never actually get it done." Fountain's attempt is decentralized enough and works today.
If lightning comments are hack, so are keysends, and the whole v4v streaming thing crumbles anyway.
reply
Adam has an aspiration for cross-platform comments that serve as their own meta-content to a show that goes with the show regardless of which app the listener uses. He also opposes a payment requirement to create comments.
Separately from this, in Podcasting 2.0 and Moe Factz w/ Adam Curry, boostagrams serve as a parallel payments methodology to fiat money, as a means of the audience sending in comments and letters to actually be read by the host, sometimes on the show.
On No Agenda they read the names of anyone donating over $50, and read the letter of anyone donating over...maybe it's $200, I can't remember. They'll read dozens of names and sometimes a dozen letters. Right now with the boostagrams, on the aforementions shows, they read the boostagrams at rather paltry amounts.
tl:dr Adam didn't want boostagrams made public