5 ms·

So, basically a blockchained-twitter-client with the hope of removing twitter at some point by swapping out the backing service? People will come for the free c

So, basically a blockchained-twitter-client with the hope of removing twitter at some point by swapping out the backing service? People will come for the free coins and nowhere to spend them, or will it cost coins to post or something? I don't get it. But I don't get the point of most blockchain bs.

pixl97 5y ago
"Blockchain, the internet, but worse"
messe 5y ago
> People will come for the free coins and nowhere to spend them, or will it cost coins to post or something? That's where the 1B in buy-orders backing the coin is meant to come in, allowing people to exchange those coins for real currency.
- withinboredom 5y ago
  That's not a lot of money for the number of users twitter has and the number of tweets that exist.
  - notwedtm 5y ago
    What if it was $20 billion? Maybe the idea is feasible if you go bigger? Still less than half of the current strategy of a hostile takeover.
- bastawhiz 5y ago
  That billion dollars isn't going to last very long when folks start piping GPT-3 into the system for free coins
  - mobiletoss1337 5y ago
    GPT-3 isn't free either. But neither is the GPT-3 to verify if the GPT-3 is GPT-3.
  - nickysielicki 5y ago
    Do the mechanics of the Skinner Box really matter? If GPT-3 generates interesting popular content and posting it is profitable because it gets retweets and reactions, is it any worse than the content that comes from real people?
    - geoffeg 5y ago
      So instead of trying to limit the number of bots on this new social network, we'll encourage them!
- christopherwxyz 5y ago
  The system isn’t immune to spam attacks.
  - latchkey 5y ago
    Posting costs a variable amount of shitcoin (just like transaction fees on a blockchain).
- Barrin92 5y ago
  okay and why am I not paying them in real currency to begin with if all I want to do is steal twitter users by paying them to come to my platform
  - ickelbawd 5y ago
    Because you need a number-go-up coin to allow for rampant speculation and to build hype. Then everyone that joins thinks they’re getting millions instead of nothing.

pixl97 5y ago

"Blockchain, the internet, but worse"

messe 5y ago

> People will come for the free coins and nowhere to spend them, or will it cost coins to post or something? That's where the 1B in buy-orders backing the coin is meant to come in, allowing people to exchange those coins for real currency.

withinboredom 5y ago
That's not a lot of money for the number of users twitter has and the number of tweets that exist.
- notwedtm 5y ago
  What if it was $20 billion? Maybe the idea is feasible if you go bigger? Still less than half of the current strategy of a hostile takeover.
bastawhiz 5y ago
That billion dollars isn't going to last very long when folks start piping GPT-3 into the system for free coins
- mobiletoss1337 5y ago
  GPT-3 isn't free either. But neither is the GPT-3 to verify if the GPT-3 is GPT-3.
- nickysielicki 5y ago
  Do the mechanics of the Skinner Box really matter? If GPT-3 generates interesting popular content and posting it is profitable because it gets retweets and reactions, is it any worse than the content that comes from real people?
  - geoffeg 5y ago
    So instead of trying to limit the number of bots on this new social network, we'll encourage them!
christopherwxyz 5y ago
The system isn’t immune to spam attacks.
- latchkey 5y ago
  Posting costs a variable amount of shitcoin (just like transaction fees on a blockchain).
Barrin92 5y ago
okay and why am I not paying them in real currency to begin with if all I want to do is steal twitter users by paying them to come to my platform
- ickelbawd 5y ago
  Because you need a number-go-up coin to allow for rampant speculation and to build hype. Then everyone that joins thinks they’re getting millions instead of nothing.