Nostr Web Client

X INFLUENCERS ARE PAID BY CORPORATE SURVEILLANCE COMPANIES TO ADDICT THEIR AUDIENCE.

MAXIMIZE ENGAGEMENT FROM VERIFIED FOLLOWERS TO MAXIMIZE THEIR CUT OF SALES TO ADVERTISING COMPANIES.

MODERN DAY SLAVE DRIVERS.

I would happily use a nostr client built around advertising if they shared that advertising revenue to the users of the platform using zaps for top viewed content. I think this is a killer feature that someone needs to build. ZBD Social's feature of watch an ad and zap content was brilliant and so far the best advertising usage I've seen deployed on nostr.

I'm not on nostr because advertising is bad. I'm on nostr because I want to own my speech. I don't mind if someone is profiting off my speech by delivering ads on their client beside it. They can do it now on nostr without even zapping creators so the client that builds an advertising structure into the platform that actually shares that revenue with users will do very well with user adoption.

nostr:note1lk66fre6wpn0hwj85hvwny2td5kv6s58v0fj2kz40l2sufam58gqz86f9d

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

cloud fodder 1y ago

i guess you havent seen the reply bots? thats what adverts would be like (already are) #airdrops

Patrick 1y ago

I'm fine with that if they're providing value to be there. Let's use Primal as an example. If they adopted an ad marketplace where they would allow inserted ads to be sold to top bidders of attention. They'd drop the advert in and collect the funds within their platform while hopefully also distributing it out to creators and maybe even the users that curated through their likes on primal's client or even attention tracking software deployed within primal apps for general users that scrolled past viewing a particular ad. This wouldn't affect the wider nostr ecosystem though the wider nostr ecosystem may still benefit through a curators reward program Primal could deploy funds to reward top creators that's content is viewed within their platform by simply zapping or NUTing creators regardless of the platform used.

Now that's nothing like replyguy who's not providing any value for being there and also spamming relay providers with unneeded events to take advantage of early notification systems with ads. The ad content may be the same message quality but as the user base grows so too will the advertising base. Eventually scammy ads will likely be priced out or if not at least highly reward the ecosystem's GDP.

Just like X does you could also make a benefit of Primal Premium be less or no ads and then share a portion of the user's subscription revenue to the creators fund. My point is I have no problem sharing the value of my attention with the nostr ecosystem or ponying up some sats for an ad free version of it helps to reward client creators, DVM ecosystem, nostr creators and the users themselves.

corndalorian 1y ago

Primal, or any client, being dependent on advertisers for revenue would be disastrous for freedom of speech for users of that client.

Nice and Kind Vic 1y ago

Gonna need an explanation of how revenue somehow is a disaster for freedom

Jordan S 1y ago

Advertiser friendly platforms would prevent unsavory posts from popping up on their platforms in order to ensure maximum revenue.

The worst thing you can do for free speech is make the platform reliant to advertisers.

Nice and Kind Vic 1y ago

The "would prevent unsavory posts from popping up on their platforms" issue can happen in leiu of advertising. See nos.social. And yes, there is a target audience for this.

EVERY PLATFORM SHOULD REMAIN EMPOWERED TO REMOVE/HIDE/FILTER/CENSOR CONTENT THAT GOES AGAINST THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE. Nostr as a protocol, with or without advertising does not alter that.

For example, even without ads, Corny Chat does not advertise all rooms.

Freedom of Speech ≠ Freedom of Reach

CitizenPleb 1y ago

“Dependent on advertisers” not “revenue”

Logen 1y ago

It’s not necessarily just the issue of revenue. It’s the issue of revenue dependency from the user.

If users only joined a platform with the understanding that they have dependency of revenue then, when the revenue runs thin or starts to run dry, the dependency runs with it.

The incentive to keep the dependency is the incentive to bring on advertisers that take advantage of their users, there is no middle ground.

JackTheMimic 1y ago

It is the inversion of product and consumer that makes it a disaster. An app that uses advertisements is no longer providing a service to its users but the advertisers under the false pretext that they are providing services to users. Under an advert model the Users are the product.

Patrick 1y ago

Under traditional social networks I'd agreed but I'd argue nostr is different. Nostr has two distinct features from traditional social that allow it to not fall to the same failures of censorship. 1) clients can easily be replaced because they don't own the content layer in nostr so they censor at their own peril 2) nostr is an open network so anyone can do anything. If I gear my platform towards advertisers then I limit my potential user base. Clients must cater to users as well here because their data and connection graph are easily swappable to a new client that caters to them more. This portability helps give users a check against platforms that abuse them.

JackTheMimic 1y ago

I mean, you can also create an app that skims everyone's Nsec and sells it to companies for money. it's at your own peril and the users might not like it if they found out but that's your right as the app dev.

You can do a lot of immoral things to make money, I didn't say you couldn't. I just said it is unethical and will be a disaster.

Patrick 1y ago

100% on anything is possible. It's the beauty of nostr.

What makes advertising unethical?

JackTheMimic 1y ago

As I stated, you are ostensibly providing a service that is not disclosed to the users on a prima fascia basis. If I provide a space IRL for people to have coffee and chat but in reality every tenth person is a salesman for a different company, I have deceived the patrons into thinking this is just a place to have conversations. Even worse is when you MAKE your patrons talk to the salesmen to get their coffee. Do you see?

Patrick 1y ago

I think the selling point of this particular platform is the relationship to advertising. The client knows you want to see ads because you're choosing to use their client. You're not there because you wanted coffee alone. You could have gotten that at Amethyst Brewing for example that doesn't give you ads while you drink. By visiting this particular coffee shop you're not going for the coffee so much as the entire network experience that shares information with you at the cost of giving you monetary value that you can then distribute out as you see fit. I'd argue this network is more like that water company that gives out free water for you viewing an ad on their machine.

JackTheMimic 1y ago

So the point here is that it is a psychological deception. People don't hear "Social network platform" and think consciously "I volunteer to be a commodity for corporate meta data collection and sales."

If I ask literally anyone "What is Twitter/X? What is Facebook?" They will never say "A place for people to volunteer personal data and be advertised to." Their misapprehension is that they are social networks and they are users of the service.

The novelty of asking users if they consent to advertising has been tried and fails due to a lack of incentive or those who do not use the service in it's intended way and exploit the system which devalues the service for the apps REAL customer, the Advertiser.

I am not against creating value for money. But the platform is not the layer on which commerce should be enacted. It is the social layer. Companies can make an account, produce engagement, and promote their product through that. Success can be earned not bought, ethically.

Patrick 1y ago

-People don't hear "Social network platform" and think consciously "I volunteer to be a commodity for corporate meta data collection and sales."

I agree but most people don't yet hear of nostr yet at all either. They aren't aware of a choice yet. I think it will become a common choice for users to decide what kind of online community they want to be a part of where users will make all kinds of choices about their platform (does it have DVMs or does it use algo relays or none at all, does it have ads, does it have ads with rewards, does it have none at all, etc)

- If I ask literally anyone "What is Twitter/X? What is Facebook?" They will never say "A place for people to volunteer personal data and be advertised to."

I think if you ask them if they know those services are listening to them they'd very clearly say yes and tell a story to you about talking to cousin Jimmy about a new pair of shoes then seeing ads. They don't yet have vernacular for it but they understand its happening and they currently consider that social media. This is part of the change that will happen. I bet they will be happy to continue seeing advertisements if it means they earn some sats for looking at it while at the same time rewarding the creators they engage with.

- The novelty of asking users if they consent to advertising has been tried and fails due to a lack of incentive or those who do not use the service in it's intended way and exploit the system which devalues the service for the apps REAL customer, the Advertiser.

This hasn't been tried on nostr to my knowledge. Nostr changes the distribution network drastically where it redefines stakeholders to a totally different setup of interests and abilities. The user is now the real customer. Advertisers, algos and DVMs are there to cater to them through the service providers that the user chooses to engage with. They aren't locked slaves on nostr, they're the real customers now.

JackTheMimic 1y ago

Points taken.

Choice is good. The market will certainly decide if it will be the aforementioned disaster or fairly lucrative. Altogether I don't think Facebook, or Instagram being lucrative was in question.

The instances of the consent driven adverts have been tried in traditional settings but also some fairly new ones too such as Brave's BAT economy and several game apps.

I still disagree as to the ethics not just on deception grounds but the privileged platform layer access to the user commodity. If I pay a dev to feature my ad it creates an incentive structure that is ultimately anti-meritocratic. You don't have to be meritocratic, I just have the opinion that it is deleterious to the goal of having a public discussion, proclamation, and information platform.

Again, you can do whatever you'd like, I'm not your dad. I just don't like the paradigm of advertising seeping into nostr on those outlined ethical grounds. But as most of how ethics goes, it amounts to "I think it will produce bad results and I don't like it."

Onward, My man.

calvadev⚡️ 1y ago

Ad revenue is particulary tricky because if you're dependent on advertisers, you're at the whim of what they want to be advertised next to, meaning they can dictate what is allowed on a medium. However, I do believe #Nostr allows for a more direct, social, and valuable way of implementing ad models that aren't necessarily exploitative.

Marc 1y ago

I prefer allocating a portion of subscriptions to a creator fun because it advertises a real world use case for #bitcoin.

Nice and Kind Vic 1y ago

Earlier in the year Corny Chat experimented with ads in the text chat area and room entry/login dialog. An ad would appear once every 15 minutes, unless you were paying any amount of sats via NWC. It had mixed results, and I decided to disable the feature until later.

I agree with you that there are meaningful ways to do ad supported systems and clients. ZBD, Fountain and Satograms was some of the first for this. The challenge is building ad systems that dont pull to many limited resources from client development, while remaining tasteful, and non overbearing. We dont want to recreate the old hellscape thats occured over the past 3 decades, yet we keep building clients that mimic the trad-tech and promote poor behaviors and outcomes.

Sacred Peak 1y ago

any client. ANY. that uses advertising as a model for revenue is an automatic uninstall for me. that #fiat advertising model invites censorship because the advertisers will demand it. no thanks. we did that already. yuck.