2 ms·
You're being downvoted and I think that's unfair. My reading of this article produced the same notion. My willingness to pay (in the form of being the recipie
by inopinatus 11y ago
You're being downvoted and I think that's unfair. My reading of this article produced the same notion. My willingness to pay (in the form of being the recipient of advertising, and the associated loss of privacy) is lower than the value I receive from most content. Therefore I block the ads except on the tiny fraction of sites for which I make exceptions. Similarly I rarely cross a paywall.
Ergo, my willingness to pay is non-zero, but current fiat-currency payment services are inadequate to represent the negotiation.
I would be willing to buy (e.g. with fiat cash or another cryptocurrency) a block of quota, denominated in a well-constructed unit, for access to content. This quota could be automatically decremented within a framework of personally definable rules. It is analogous to the GB blocks I buy from my ISP, but the unit might instead represent the market value of information.
Bitcoin itself is not answer - there are limitations that preclude microtransactions at scale, and traceability issues - but some distributed cryptocurrency will be the solution. It will take luck and genius to design & establish. The Ethereum project gives me hope that a solution will be found within a couple of decades.