← Back to context

Comment by echelon

7 hours ago

This is one of the most interesting properties of peer-to-peer networks.

You can run your own ingestion algorithms, and one of the things you can do is set up inbound rules that incorporate micro transactions.

We have to build a lot of infrastructure to make this work, but it seems ideal for a world full of agents and autonomous systems acting on our behalf.

4 comments

echelon

Reply
direwolf20  6 hours ago

Do the outbound rules of other participants include microtransactions?

And who besides a spammer would pay more than $0 to have their message read by you? If I wrote a blog post about vulnerabilities of blockchains, or how I ran Doom on a pregnancy test, and you don't read it because I'm not paying you, you're losing value, not me. You guarantee an inbox of only spam — but at least you get paid for it.

  • echelon  6 hours ago

    If you've got great content, I would just follow you. Or someone I follow would follow you, and through the network it would lead to discovery. I want your content, so unless you charge for it, nobody's paying anyone.

    If someone wants me to ingest something novel from far outside my network, one way to gain reputation might be to pay a microtransaction fee. I'd be free to choose to set that up as a part of my ingestion algorithm. Or maybe my peers do it, and if they "upvote" the content, I see it.

    If my peers start acting poorly and sending spam, I can flag disinterest and my algorithm can naturally start deboosting that part of the network.

    With such systems-level control, we should be able to build really excellent tooling, optimization, and statistical monitoring.

    Also, since all publications are digitally signed, your content wouldn't have to be routed to me through your node at all. You could in fact never connect to the swarm and I could still read your content if you publish it to a peer that has distribution.