#asknostr
Discussion
Satoshis as likes, fair BTC payments for services. Content should be free to enjoy, but creators need sustainable models. Optional tipping + fixed BTC pricing + crowdfunding incentives = a balanced Bitcoin economy. 🤷🏽‍♀️ Still, just ideas, would love to hear insights from the community.
I’m gonna have to write a rebuttal
I agree on the basis of Benefit to Cost Ratio of Attack.
Under V4V, you have no cost for people to consume what you produce, and solely depend on a voluntary reciprocation. You have no boundary to ensure you take enough from the consumers to sustain yourself, and you'll eventually lose everything you have when people economize their limited resources.
Payment for services > Value for Value
To be clear I’m specifically talking about digital content. I don’t know why you’d use V4V for actual physical products you’re producing, if people are doing that. There is a cost per item, and it’s easy enough to calculate a fair price per item people can pay if they want it. For digital content, there is the same cost to produce 1 copy of it as there is to produce 1 million copies of it. This is different than physical goods, but it is an advantage to the artist if they know how to make use of it. It’s a reason why streaming platforms have become the defacto way people consume digital content. The problem is, most people can’t make money from these platforms any more, and even if you manage to crack the code of their algorithmic systems, they completely control you and can deplatform and censor you as they choose. If you are small and unknown, good luck ever making any traction. V4V, especially V4V utilizing nostr and bitcoin, immediately gives you the ability to monetize your content from day 1. It is still up to you though to create good things people want to consume and share, and perhaps even pay you for.
Never heard of v4v - can you give a quick synopsis or perhaps a link?
Thanks (I know I could Google but people are still the best resources... ;) )
This website is a good one:
had a look, yeah i can get both sides of the argument... I have often thought it needs a solution in the middle.
I won't pay for an article i just read for free, BUT if i could read the first third of an article for free and then be offered "read the rest for 300 sats" of COURSE I would click that button...
You have to prevent free-riding and allow donations... fine balance, but possible!!
one solution might be even to say
"hey you have to pay to read, BUT after reading you will be given the option to get the sats back"
I think it's one thing to read something FOR FREE but another to demand money back for an article you considered worthy...
Another option might be for you to read something and realize you’ve actually gained something from it and then give a little bit back. If you found it worthless then move on.
Many, perhaps even most, will take advantage and consume/enjoy content without giving back, like you said you would selfishly do. But in the end that’s ok because there are enough people who aren’t selfish and who realize that life is not a free ride for anyone and they usually end up supporting more than they need to.
I support your view, that V4V is actually donating for something that was valuable for you. I think it is therefor powerful, since it is kind of a libre-opensource- philosophy. So everyone should be able to read the content for free. And those who have the money to support the creator, do so. Like this people from poor circumstances still get full access.