Subnostr

A rule of thumb when designing nostrian economics, which I'd call "desirables vs undesirables".

When user action is desirable, user should be able to get sats for it.

If the action is undesirable, user should be paying sats for it.

For example spamming a lot of people with the same comment including link? Should cost sats when you do it too much, maybe even with "exponentially" increasing cost.

Posting great, high quality post that helps a lot of folks? That should be easy to zap sats to, etc.

Who decides what's desirable and what not? In practice all actors in the network can use this rule of thumb from their PoV. Client devs can implement this, users can zap or not zap, relays can forward or not forward... In a sense this is a flavor of #value4value scaled to a full social network.

@npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s,

@npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z, @npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6, @npub18lzls4f6h46n43revlzvg6x06z8geww7uudhncfdttdtypduqnfsagugm3, @npub13ql75nq8rldygpkjke47y893akh5tglqtqzs6cspancaxktthsusvfqcg7, wdyt? Is this rule of thumb any helpful? 🔥🔥🔥

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

J 2y ago

individual think > group think

nout 2y ago

I believe this statement is true, but I don't think it's trivial or self evident...

J 2y ago

Neither trivial or self evident, though maybe self evident is the end goal for such a statement (one can dream). I believe the individual should be first and foremost the ONLY filter for all information and that the individual decides what they deem as worthy (or as you posed it, desirable vs undesirable). Outsourcing this basic of a responsibility to group think leads us to where the majority of the world finds itself today. At best, misinformed and at worst, controlled. Just my poorly constructed view on an incredibly important topic.

nout 2y ago

And I appreciate your take! The thing that made me pause when pondering this is that I think there is a value in hierarchies and there are cases where a group can do more than just an individual. Which then means that there is some balance of cases where group driven decision/thinking will do better than individual driven decision/thinking.

I agree that in current globalized world with all sorts of information available at fingertips, but also captured by different actors, we are way too much into the groupthinking side and need to course correct or this will end really really bad.

J 2y ago

I believe I understand your initial pause. Given the sheer amount of information.. you’re saying that allowing a “trusted” group to act as an arbiter is simply more efficient and maybe a requirement for productive discourse? Convenience vs full responsibility?

Not intentioned as an argument. Hopefully not read as such.

nout 2y ago

Yes, I think there are cases where that's the case :) For example when designing a nuclear plant I think relying on a group of nuclear physicists and engineers is a good idea.

No one in a world has capacity to know all there is to know in the world (this is somewhat new phenomenon - it has been true for the last couple of centuries) and so we need to have division of responsibilities.

But maybe I'm pulling this topic from a different corner than you are?

J 2y ago

We all come from different corners! The point is more than valid. I’m only advocating for increased individual responsibility. I think we agree.

roya ୨୧ 2y ago

Off topic but your avatar makes me want to play fallout again

035d1314... 2y ago

Loved that game!

nout 2y ago

I know right? I had spent good times with fallout 2. I also hit an interesting bug when a locker in Klamath had literally all items in the game in it. So that made things easier 😁