5 ms·

Can someone explain to me why I should pay to use the dapp Twitter clone?

• jabgrabdthrow 8y ago
  You definitely shouldn't!
  • forcer 8y ago
    If the price is meaningless amount I would actually be more comfortable paying than being a "product" that is being sold. Especially if there is no friction in paying and apps would subtract little amounts of cryptocurrency and I could review from time to time if all is in check
• RexetBlell 8y ago
  Censorship resistance. Twitter could delete your account (or some of your tweets) if they wanted to. They could also prevent your tweets appearing in other people's feeds. And they have done this to some controversial figures. Basically a Dapp is a more neutral platform that costs money. Probably not worth the cost for the average person though.
• lifty 8y ago
  One reason is to move from being the product to being a user, so that your attention is not sold to the highest bidder and your behaviour manipulated in such a way that it produces the highest value. Of course, paying with your attention is a valid way of paying for things as long as the implications are clear. edit: spelling mistakes
  • paulgb 8y ago
    IMO, federation is a better model of this. With Mastodon, sure somebody is still paying server costs, but there is no unavoidable fee for the software/service and it has the same censorship-resistent properties. (I'd like to see signed messages in Mastodon but that's not a problem inherent to a federated model)
• laurentoget 8y ago
  Unless you are involved in neo-nazi organizations or narcotics distribution, i do not see it either.