I'm a fan of @24 . But I don't see anything that Boost does better than standard payments with Bitcoin. It's the economics that fails. It clearly diverts funds away from what should be going to content creators and promoters/marketers to miners.
Post by twetch#3375
Just try not using it and see what happens!!!
What the chain says
- Block
- 633 333
- Time
- 2020-05-03T22:38:48Z
- Signer
- 1Abd9yJS6mrzMmj1Ni6kjQB9GqtyaNujrm
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#3375
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
1Abd9yJS6mrzMmj1Ni6kjQB9GqtyaNujrm VerifiedReplies (10)
It will be an interesting experiment. I think it will be easy not to use it. If I want to signal in a superior manner all I have to discern which party to pay directly. Please..show me one case where this won't be true. I want to be wrong.
It's just quicker to discern if you use Boost because you will be closer to good ideas all the time. If you don't use it you will have to spend more time discerning and you will be farther from good ideas.
Suppose a song gets $1000000.00 worth of Boosts and the content creator gets $5k somehow. Has the content creator been properly incentivized? Or is it really obvious that the wrong party is getting paid?
Boost is an upvote system. It's for when you want attention. It's up to the buyers to value their information correctly. In this scenario, it sounds like the songwriter got enough boost to get a high content ranking for a song that people didn't like.