3 ms·

This parody is quite funny, but it's actually a take on the micro-transaction model more than web3. Web3 sites could work exactly the same as web2 sites except

This parody is quite funny, but it's actually a take on the micro-transaction model more than web3. Web3 sites could work exactly the same as web2 sites except for the bits people want to own themselves. I don't imagine many people care about owning a Like or a comment. What's perhaps even more fun to think about is that somewhere in a lofty corner office at Instagram there's someone with a math or compsci PhD doing calculations to figure out exactly how much every Post, Story, Like and comment costs to post on Insta, and precisely how often an advert needs to be displayed to cover that. At least with micro-transactions there's no adverts (in theory I mean, of course there would still be adverts) and it's all very obvious how you're paying.

qbasic_forever 5y ago
The cost to post (just an upload) is going to be a lot smaller in the long run than the cost for people to view popular content (tons and tons of bandwidth, some db access, etc.). So it's kind of a weird model to charge for posting or contributing. Really you'd want to charge for time spent viewing... and then you've basically invented AOL again.
- cormacrelf 5y ago
  If only there were a way to subscribe to curated collections of content for a flat fee using some kind of revolutionary new internet
- PretzelPirate 5y ago
  I’m surprised they charge to post at all since the most likely approach to build this in real life would be to use a validium (stores data Offchain) and the cost to the network operators would be fixed and very cheap.
chrismorgan 5y ago
It’s a bit of both, really: although a lot of its commentary is about a the transactional model, it is at the least exacerbated drastically by the cost of actions which takes it far out of the micro-transaction level. If you compared it with a traditional database system that adopted cost-based micro-transactions, well, that one would actually be micro-transactions, at least several orders of magnitude cheaper, at which point a lot of the complaints the site is making barely apply by comparison.
nicbou 5y ago
The shift in incentives would encourage more transactions for the sake of monetisation.

qbasic_forever 5y ago

The cost to post (just an upload) is going to be a lot smaller in the long run than the cost for people to view popular content (tons and tons of bandwidth, some db access, etc.). So it's kind of a weird model to charge for posting or contributing. Really you'd want to charge for time spent viewing... and then you've basically invented AOL again.

cormacrelf 5y ago
If only there were a way to subscribe to curated collections of content for a flat fee using some kind of revolutionary new internet
PretzelPirate 5y ago
I’m surprised they charge to post at all since the most likely approach to build this in real life would be to use a validium (stores data Offchain) and the cost to the network operators would be fixed and very cheap.

chrismorgan 5y ago

It’s a bit of both, really: although a lot of its commentary is about a the transactional model, it is at the least exacerbated drastically by the cost of actions which takes it far out of the micro-transaction level. If you compared it with a traditional database system that adopted cost-based micro-transactions, well, that one would actually be micro-transactions, at least several orders of magnitude cheaper, at which point a lot of the complaints the site is making barely apply by comparison.

nicbou 5y ago

The shift in incentives would encourage more transactions for the sake of monetisation.