Agree

Generally agree. However, I typically don't stream sats to podcasts that also have ads or sponsors.

#[2]

Fully agree. It feels good to pay for something. It feels right to provide value to someone that provided me with value.

100% agreed

Agree

Agree. I pay a lot more on stackernews than I do around here because the UI at SN makes it trivial while here I need to do 25 clicks and input a password.

Agree.

Need to add the micropayment aspect.

The ability to send a fraction of a fiat penny cannot be overlooked.

Splits are also critical to recognize.

In Podcasting 2.0, listeners know that they are also supporting app developers, service providers and other important people in the ecosystem directly.

💯

💯

Yes

What are some audience-supported podcasts without ads? Curently I have #[2]'s Citadel Dispatch and #[3]'s No Agenda

Totally agree ⚡️💜⚡️

My zaps are growing but once I can do it from within the app, lord help me.

Yes completely. Since Nostr, I've budgeted an amount of sats for zapping and this didn't happen before. Since I still pay a fiat subscription for Spotify it made sense to give myself a "Sats subscription for Nostr"

I think that will work out for "charity" / helping people who struggle aswell.

People want to give and help.

Helping someone directly, especially when they provide something (wisdom, art etc.) makes charity organisations where you pay the organisation and hope they give something along obsolete.

YES

Agree, it's very important to reduce friction. People are lazy and every hurdle is one too much

At scale, it’s pretty obvious to me that this is more or less the start of a new form of digital agora where information will be rewarded in-kind and self-sovereign.

Your post is being talked about.

Added to the https://member.cash/hot feed

Create a nostr client with integrated LN wallet so that you don't have to shell out when zapping. If zaps from that client are higher than other clients (after accounting for confounders), it should lend weight to this hypothesis.

on the money, Mr. Gigi

Agree

I think it's still early & it needs to be viewed through a long timeframe.

Typically fiat conditioning allows us to take something given without reciprocating. The assumption is that nothing is free. That the provider of value somehow gains from the giving (no such thing as a free lunch).

In early V4V trades you'll have a few generous people that give more than it cost to provide the service to them. They make the trade worthwhile but it doesn't feel fair. A few will provide a token payment and the majority will take without payment.

Reciprocity is a part of what makes our tribal bonds so strong, it's built into our DNA. With time the taking without settlement becomes a burden to the taker. A burden that can only be offloaded through giving in a similar fashion.

When assessing the success of V4V trades, you can't look at the success of your first trades as a sign of success or failure. Your latter trades are building on the value given in your your earlier trades.

The most beautiful thing about V4V using bitcoin is that in time even the unprofitable trades become profitable. Every sat is either kept for the future or goes back into the circular economy. It rarely goes back into the fiat system.

🤙

For sure! https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2023/02/one-click-checkout-increases-spending-and-engagement#:~:text=New%20Cornell%20research%20shows%20that,28.5%25%20from%20previous%20buying%20levels.

Circular economy enters the chat.