3 ms·

Only downside is you can't inflate the supply for unique purposes. For example PeakD.com inflates hive to give content creators tips based on likes. Edit: I t

Only downside is you can't inflate the supply for unique purposes. For example PeakD.com inflates hive to give content creators tips based on likes. Edit: I thought this was legitimate reasoning behind having your own token. I don't mean it in an inflammatory way. Please explain why you disagree.

noxer 5y ago
I dont think this is a downside at all. If you build on a existing blockchain you ofc need funding rather than "printing" you own funding. It may be harder but also less of a legal risk. BTW Coil.com pays content creators based on user interaction. Its however not self printed money its form actual user who want to support content creator rather than ad-companies. Ofc coil itself runs on funding money like any other startup nothing wrong with that. Also a project can ask the team behind the DLT they want to use and possibly get some of their reserves. Its in their interest that the DLT is used for something. Actual devs who build something are worth way more than the thousands of people who just buy something because Elon Musk tweets about it. And btw at the same time a dev can still bet on price gains or the token they use. I see no moral problem with that. If your product actually creates demand that moves the price up and you bet on that you own it.
- reedjosh 5y ago
  The nice thing about "printing" vs funding for things like this is that you don't need users to sign up or transfer funds to be able to tip content providers. That said I do prefer the Coil.com model as I love crowd funded ad free media content, and I _do_ pay for it. : )
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> Edit: I thought this was legitimate reasoning behind having your own token. I don't mean it in an inflammatory way. Please explain why you disagree. Because you don't need to create a token at all to tip creators, inflationary or otherwise. If you want to use crypto, just use an existing blockchain. Or don't use crypto and just create a centralized market that pays out at certain thresholds. Blockchain solutions aren't actually cheaper than centralized solutions, they just hide all of the costs elsewhere in transaction fees and mining payouts. The only reason to create an all-new token is to have something to sell to people under the guise of enabling value. It was a bad trick when car washes sold car wash tokens instead of letting you pay for car washes directly, and it's a bad trick when crypto companies make you buy their tokens instead of just buying the service directly.
- reedjosh 5y ago
  > Because you don't need to create a token at all to tip creators, inflationary or otherwise. But if you don't do it through inflationary means, then consumers have to actually send tips and or have accounts. (for better or worse) Inflation is a nice way to build incentives into the currency's structure. Further, Hive has no transaction fees as that's funded via inflation as well. I do like the idea of a streaming value for value service wherein I have a wallet that I top up from time to time, but there are many models that are viable here.

noxer 5y ago

I dont think this is a downside at all. If you build on a existing blockchain you ofc need funding rather than "printing" you own funding. It may be harder but also less of a legal risk. BTW Coil.com pays content creators based on user interaction. Its however not self printed money its form actual user who want to support content creator rather than ad-companies. Ofc coil itself runs on funding money like any other startup nothing wrong with that. Also a project can ask the team behind the DLT they want to use and possibly get some of their reserves. Its in their interest that the DLT is used for something. Actual devs who build something are worth way more than the thousands of people who just buy something because Elon Musk tweets about it. And btw at the same time a dev can still bet on price gains or the token they use. I see no moral problem with that. If your product actually creates demand that moves the price up and you bet on that you own it.

reedjosh 5y ago
The nice thing about "printing" vs funding for things like this is that you don't need users to sign up or transfer funds to be able to tip content providers. That said I do prefer the Coil.com model as I love crowd funded ad free media content, and I _do_ pay for it. : )

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> Edit: I thought this was legitimate reasoning behind having your own token. I don't mean it in an inflammatory way. Please explain why you disagree. Because you don't need to create a token at all to tip creators, inflationary or otherwise. If you want to use crypto, just use an existing blockchain. Or don't use crypto and just create a centralized market that pays out at certain thresholds. Blockchain solutions aren't actually cheaper than centralized solutions, they just hide all of the costs elsewhere in transaction fees and mining payouts. The only reason to create an all-new token is to have something to sell to people under the guise of enabling value. It was a bad trick when car washes sold car wash tokens instead of letting you pay for car washes directly, and it's a bad trick when crypto companies make you buy their tokens instead of just buying the service directly.

reedjosh 5y ago
> Because you don't need to create a token at all to tip creators, inflationary or otherwise. But if you don't do it through inflationary means, then consumers have to actually send tips and or have accounts. (for better or worse) Inflation is a nice way to build incentives into the currency's structure. Further, Hive has no transaction fees as that's funded via inflation as well. I do like the idea of a streaming value for value service wherein I have a wallet that I top up from time to time, but there are many models that are viable here.