1/5
It's less risky to benefit from manipulation when you can influence the information flow than when you can't. When you can set the price and hence the barriers to entry above your competition you have a monopoly.
Boost may increase the risk, but
Post by twetch#18433
2/5
it decreases the RELATIVE risk for those with more capital or following. Allowing a self reinforcing loop where they can use their privileges and grow a network effect to maintain their dominance & stifle their competition.
Why should truth telling
What the chain says
- Block
- 630 307
- Time
- 2020-04-12T15:51:07Z
- Signer
- 1CndCzdXifj1S7LtYttbK6WuZuowjrYmfg
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#18433
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
1CndCzdXifj1S7LtYttbK6WuZuowjrYmfg VerifiedReplies (11)
3/5
cooperators be able to afford more?
I have no problem with attempts to layer profits on services. I feel it's becoming somewhat off track focusing so hard on the signalling effect of transactions.
Instead we can focus on the plethora of opportunities
4/5
to add layers to services that build on the newly aligned interests of user bases that micro transactions bring.
The opportunity to deliver what the user wants. Capitalizing on the untapped efficiency of aligning the user with the product. Away from
5/5
the traditional method of offering opportunities for groups to profit on the user base.
I hope I'm wrong, sure I'm missing something, don't understand half of it and wish you the best of luck. But if I'm right, I look forward to breaking it.
If you know something better to do, you do it and earn more bitcoins. I'm doing what I think Bitcoiners need the most.
1/2
My goal is to increase the value of bitcoins by growing their functions hence widening types of tools that can be built furthering growth.
This desires valuable developers aligned with that goal. Working efficiently, where they'll also earn the most
Read "Biological Signals as Handicaps" Grafen 1990.
1/2
Thank you, for those interested in an excellent review and critique:
The Handicap Principle: how an erroneous hypothesis became a scientific principle Penn 2019
https://bit.ly/2y6k52y
IMO, as far as actionable lessons, almost all that can be salvaged
2/2
is Spence's https://bit.ly/3b62syr
assumption, viz. 'cost of signal MUST be lower for high value info and act as signal to receiver such that they will pay a higher cost'
High cost != honest, must consider individual case cost/benefit of deception
You can't control information flow with Boost because we just rank all content by proof-of-work.