17mNxa…zGjY

The whole "costly signal" debate is tiresome. It seems like the more people study the theory, the more disconnected from reality they get.

I need to clarify. It's not certain that Twetch will implement Paychain. I just think they will kick ass if they do.

ATTENTION App developers. Let me know if you want to implement Paychain. I want to be available for you.

Paychain paper:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U8jrQiZ5m_WKh3wYKpQsfG-airGNtTVqPY6ciGMTAH4/edit?usp=sharing

I need to give @4 some credit for Paychain, especially the name. He helped me articulate some of the ideas. I pretty much think that it should be implemented whenever "boosts" and marketing of content is desired.

I guess the key thing to analyze is the effect of capital as an input to the system. Systems are complex things.

@4 I hope the following link will work for interested parties to look at my Paychain paper.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U8jrQiZ5m_WKh3wYKpQsfG-airGNtTVqPY6ciGMTAH4/edit?usp=sharing

yes. Suppose P1 and P2 are fixed. Then P1 and P2 get paid every single like. And P3-P5 are the last 3 in your paychain.

Paychain is going to take Twetch mainstream and kill Twitter.

To keep the payment profile simple, it's necessary to make ensure that the fixed Payees must include P1 through Pn, where 1<=n<=5.

So when Paychain? @4

Payment algorithm goes something like:
0 Like happens

1. Generate 5 link paychain / Substitute fixed IDs
2. Translate IDs to Paymails
3. Pay out according to Payment profile.

I pretty much fully defined it fully within the last hour to @4 other than specifying that P1 should be paid of any P-value doesn't exist.

For this to work, every "like" record must contain the ID of the Payee that caused the like. And that ID must translate to a paymail so payments can be made. This can make a calculable chain of likes that goes back all the way to the Content Creator.

For any given Like, P5 will be paid first. P5 is the one who exposed liker to the content. P4 is the one who exposed him to the content. Etc. Fixed P-values override this.

Have your rep meet me on Atlantis slack.

@4 @3 Basically the theme of my posts is the best way for everyone to make more money on Twetch is to implement a system that lets people decide how to pay out fees. Then optimal fee structure will arise naturally.

Consider payment profile (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5). By default they will be 'fixed', which means once assigned will not change for further payments. If P3 is fixed, then P(less than 3) must be fixed as well. Generally P1 is the Content Creator.

Now it's just time to talk about the math and details on how to implement it.

If Twetch implements my Content Creator specified fee structure system, I'm going to try out 10,50,25, 15, 0 profile to see if that shit will pop.

@4 Please implement the standard MLM profile for a bit to analyze the empirical results.

/pay @4 $1.00 to seriously consider this.

s/first like/first liker/

Imagine Twetch with a standard MLM profile: 80,20,0,0,0. Likes would cost 6c + some tiny miner fee. For every Like, Twetch would get 1c, content creator 4c, and first like would get 1c. What you think, would there be more Likes/content/aggregators?

/pay @3 $1.00 for giggles.

The MLM profile of a Twetch Like is 50,50,0,0,0, where Twetch inappropriately fills the agent slot.

The MLM profile of Daniel's Boost is 0,100,0,0,0 , where his Boost Miners inappropriately act as an agent. The content creators maybe get paid on the back end. This is status quo and you can be judge of whether it's good.

With content creators getting all money after mining/app fees, the multi-level marketing profile would be 100,0,0,0,0 where the numbers would be percentages of the boost amount after mining/app fees. 80,20,0,0,0 is usually standard. Often agents take 20%.

Twetch should have low flat fees for twetches, branches, likes etc following the standard high volume/low fee model. Of course uploading stuff to the Bitcoin Data Structure (blockchain) depends on what you're uploading.

Incidentally, @4 Just being able to Boost content is a capability that apps like Twetch can charge content creators to activate. Read my posts today to see how I think Boosts should directly pay content creators (not miners).

Boosts should be implemented as a fee structure that is set by the content creator. This should be specified as an auditable MLM fee structure, where the content creator could possibly specify 100% to himself. All marketing == MLM technically speaking.

Boost is backed by capital, not Proof of Work. It doesn't matter that PoW is involved in the system because it's not an input to the system.