We need to rethink the web so that fewer third parties are involved in things that seem on the surface to be an A-B conversation. To say nothing of the trustworthiness of those parties, having them involved at all is needlessly brittle.
This seems like a nice stepping stone towards something cool, but having the forming happen at a dedicated facility seems to miss the point. The promise of this technology is that instead of:
- make packaging
-> ship to where product is packed
-> ship to consumer
-> ship to recycler
you can:
- grow packaging where product is packed
-> ship to consumer
- consumer composts it in their garden
That is, the packaging should just make one trip instead of three. Hopefully they eventually figure out how to make kits so that shippers can just grow the packaging around the actual product. The hard part will be ensuring that the biomass used as feedstock (likely a waste product from some process nearby to where the product is packed) is actually something that people want in their garden. Doable, but maybe not the kind of thing markets can be trusted to do on their own.
Circumventing controls as a kid is what taught me enough about computers to get the job that made college affordable (in those days you could just boot windows to a livecd Linux distro and have your way with the filesystem, first you feel like a hacker, later the adults are paying you to recover data).
If we must have controls, I hope the process of circumventing them continues to teach skills that are useful for other things.
I think the problem is that people are lonely in ways that the medium can't address well, but does address to some lesser degree, so it elicits lopsided engagement. You're this whole person but people only ever react to this quirk or that one because those quirks come through better online, and over time those two quirks become a larger share of your personality. We end up with things like looksmaxxing--because pictures go online well, and it happens at the expense of whatever other characteristics of that person don't go online well.
I've been imagining a social medium which finds temporary peers via one of your phone's radios--so it broadcasts and gathers rotating public keys as you ride the same bus with people or share an elevator with them--and then your feed contains whatever they're posting, but only for 48 hours or something (unless you decide to make the connection permanent). That way when you see something cool in your feed, you're well positioned to go be social in meatspace.
Like I get why you don't bring your guitar on the bus, same reason I don't bring my drums on the bus, but if a few hours later I saw a video of you making some music I might be like "hey lets get together and jam" next time I see you.
The issue is the fantasy of social media doesn't convert well to reality. I've reached out numerous times "to jam" with people who have openly expressed a desire to, and... ...nothing. It's like a full conversation stopper. It's weird.
As far as I can tell the social anxiety takes hold, where someone might have their perceived fear of "being bad" exposed, so they recede back into their insular, online-only personas.
I take it you're a musician, and so I really think the only way is to take your drums (or guitar, or whatever) to the park or a local 'town square' and just get down to business. People will interact with you in whichever way they do, but at least it will be real, and possibly lead to real fruitful relationships.
The question of whether the users are actually ready to defend is irrelevant if the attackers look at the defenses and decide that an attack isn't worth mounting. As we have learned, this is not a credible threat:
> It will be hard, but we'll self host if we have to
Bluesky offers:
> It will be easy-ish, and we'll self host if we have to
We shall see if it's credible enough to make corruption look elsewhere.
Yeah, BAT was supposed to be exactly this, you'd mine it by browsing and tolerating non targeted ads from your browser and you'd pay it to content creators in lieu of tolerating their targeted ads.
It was a great idea, but I get the feeling that it stalled somewhere along the way.
> We know that micropayments can work because mobile games are a thing.
Paying $1.00 for an in app purchase that you thought about and decided on is not a micropayment, that's just a small payment.
What makes micropayments interesting is that they can be small enough to escape notice, except in aggregate. They happen in the background, tightly coupled to the thing they're for, and not as part of an explicit purchase that added friction to the consumer's day.
I think there's probably a lot of potential to simplify things with micropayments. Like perhaps rather than paying my mobile provider to maintain a web of relationships with regional network operators and distribute money to them on cadence which has nothing to do with my usage of their network, I could instead just attach some money to each packet and transmit it to the lowest bidder in range (payment stays in escrow until packet delivered, then pays all operators involved). It could be that by cutting out the middleman I pay less and the network operators get more.
There should be a new word for the not-exactly-micro-micropayments that the author describes. I suggest "minipayments".
As you, I associate the micropayment idea with truly tiny individual payments. Like paying for bandwidth by megabyte, where each payment is much less than a cent.
The risk of fraud due to any individual payment not being fulfilled is low. At most you loose 0.01c of money, and the vendor loses $ of potential business.
I'm reminded of how tedious it is when people debate how small something has to be before it can be called a microservice... Maybe the language needs to focus on something besides size.
If you pre-pay, you're creating a debt which is destroyed when service is rendered. If you post-pay you're creating a debt when service is rendered that is destroyed when you pay. In both cases the logic of when and how you pay is decoupled from the thing you're paying for. You've got to ask how far you'll let the two accountings drift (sync monthly is a common choice).
My feeling for "micropayments" is that they happen as part of the same protocol which is providing service. There's just one accounting. Settlement schedule is determined by the nature of the service. Maybe it's page views or packets or gulps, but whatever it is it's imposed by circumstance. They're... situated payments?
The difference is that in micropayments the debt is practicially nothing, a fraction of a cent. So there's basicially no risk. Pre-pay, post-pay, doesn't really matter.
With minipayments, you could still lose a dollar or something. It's like a vending machine. If I put in a dollar and don't get a cookie, I will be pissed. You can run a buisness of setting up fraudulent vending machines that scam customers on the first purchase and dont put out cookies.
I don't really care if I put a tenth of a cent in and don't get my crumb out. I just won't buy the rest of the cookie. The margin on selling me the whole cookie is greater than scamming me out of a fraction of a cent. So it's not feasible to scam.
So the distinction matters. It's a difference in kind because in one model there is enough risk to sustain a buisness model off of scamming, which requires all this extra infrastructure for fraud prevention.
The benefit of micropayments is you don't need all this overhead for for fraud. Anyone can set up a vending machine pretty much anywhere and sell to anyone else.
The $1 in-game content payments are already so well known (and for such a long time) as "micropayments" I had thought that was where the term originated.
Isn’t it microtransactions? Which kind of hints at the difference, since it’s all the ceremony of a two party transaction, while micropayments proposals usually have some focus on being automatic or frictionless
I agree, but that's not something you can maintain an advantage on for long.
Perhaps there's enough overlap among the low hanging fruit that you can initially sell a harness that makes both genomics researchers and urban planners happy... but pretty quickly you're going to need to be the right kind of specialist to build an effective harness for it.
reply