Although a better option IMO would be pay-per-use. Relays keep a balance and deduct 1 sat per event, for example. Or maybe 1 sat per 10 events. I don't know how many events a user creates. #[4] what do you think?
Discussion
Still open to all options. We do agree though a one time fee doesn’t make sense long term.
The real resource consumption right now is coming from requests (readers) not writers. Client authentication is the next step and I expect we will see some paid relays move to paid read/write not just write. Otherwise 5% writers are paying for the resource consumption of 95% readers.
IMO it needs to stay that way. Pay to read is a non-starter, there are too many relays and your follows could be anywhere. Writers have to pay, it's just the way it is. I wonder what the numbers would be if you did total cash outflows divided by total number of writes. How many sats per write (or hopefully, writes per sat) would you need to turn a profit?
Why does one pay a relay at all? For read filtering and targeted feeds á la filter.nostr.wine. IMHO it should be a subscription by time.
You pay so that others will not automatically assume your content is spam. Reading from a paid relay means you are confident that there is very little spam in the feed. Creators pay for that discoverability.
You can stick to 100% free use, but majority of users will filter you as spam unless they are your follower (or maybe your follower's follower).
Also #[7] I had another idea that maybe you guys should look into. Eventually we will need a YouTube replacement. That means servers that can receive, compress, and stream video for nostr clients. There are potentially a number of different models:
- Pay per video uploaded
- Pay per MB of video uploaded
- In the nostr spirit of flipping revenue models on their head, uploaders do revenue share with hosts by paying *per view*. e.g., you upload a video and buy 1000 views for X sats. When consumed, buy another 1000. This would work if content creators made money in the usual ways (ads, product placements, Livestream tips, etc). Since they keep 100% of that revenue (as opposed to Google taking 50% off the top), they pay for what resources they consume via their audience. (Of course anyone could pay, but it would make sense to allow and encourage creators to pay so that their audience can view for free.)
I don't like this, as it incentivizes event volume, instead of filter quality.
“incentivizes”?
The incentive is that you get to write events to the relay.
Ah, you mean write events. That's different obviously. But one can just write events to multiple free relays. What's the advantage of paying to write events to any particular relay?
Every paid relay is currently “pay to write, free to read”.
Pay-to-write is the spam prevention mechanism, and the incentive is that you want a reliable host for your content as well as discoverability by others.
Hashcash (Bitcoin's Proof of Work) was invented as a pay-to-write model for email. Now we use it as pay-to-write on the timechain.