@24 If BoostPoW also associates content to data sets, then …
@24 If BoostPoW also associates content to data sets, then it won't be complete BS. For example the boost simultaneously boosts content and its review/tag etc..then maybe it won't suck. But just feeding hungry miners ain't going to cut it.
Replies
If you don't want it don't buy it!
I just gave you a way out of this mess..and that's all you got?
Sure, what else is there to say? I've already explained a lot about why I think it's a good idea and clearly you don't agree so therefore the service isn't for you.
The service is only a good idea if the boost applies to both content and some corresponding data such as a review. Then I will use your Boost if I like the association.. because I will be boosting the association not the content.
I'm trying to help you.
If I want to boost content, I'll pay the content creator..which is on record and can completely be used as a boost. Sales statistics have always served this purpose. I won't buy something because some idiot boosts his own content.
Thanks but I don't need your help and I don't need you as a customer either. Boost can be used in the way you describe but you're wrong about when it's a good idea.
I wish I was wrong. But I'm not. You'll just have to wait for the empirical evidence to contradict your funny ideas.
You can try that and see how well it works.
Why do you wish you're wrong?
If you're right, BSV gets a win. But costly signaling is fundamentally marketing. This is something I know about.
Don't worry. I'm right. Costly signalling is fundamentally game theory. The paper "Biological Signals as Handicaps" proves that handicaps are a stable strategy for communicating fitness.
If you were talking about getting laid and procreating, I would agree with you. But costly signaling when applied to selling stuff is not the same.
I've been following all the objections to BoostPoW. The objections summarized: 1. You can't use the same costly signals in every context. 2. Getting devs to collude to respect your costly signaling does not make those costly signals valid for the context.
If I'm right everyone will have to use it whether they like it or not. Some people are going to argue and say it doesn't work no matter what. I think you are of this type. Just try not using it and see what happens.
I would also add an objection: Costly signals compete. Costly signals that pay content creators are more attractive than costly signals that pay miners.
That is an argument I expect from BTCers to give for Segwit and Lightning Network.
Like I'm forced to use it on Baemail? It sticks out like an ugly out of place sore ... because that is what it is.
What's the point of winning arguments?
Like I'm forced to use it on Baemail? It sticks out like an ugly out of place sore ... because that is what it is.
that is the hope isn’t it to have the greatest proof of work assigned to the best creations
Your whole BoostPoW bypasses the strength of Bitcoin, which is to make micropayments and directly pay everybody for their work. It actually mirrors the current failing system that has big marketing firms pay to play, and pay everyone on the backend.
I'm sorry but you just don't understand it. If you don't like it, just don't buy any.
I understand it too well. You have people thinking they will be able to boost their own content and have it seen. That's cute. Economically, BoostPoW scales like transaction mining. Big Marketing with crap content would win..until BoostPoW fails.