Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

basicattentiontoken.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 61 posts

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#41

Post by kolinko »

Jabanga wrote: post #38
hudon wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's really easy to move between currencies once you've got accounts on the right exchanges. wait so the users are going to need more than one kind of token? And they're going to need to open accounts on an exchange? > Without cryptocurrency, you'd need some way for a user to pay all websites they visit. Ads can go on any browser and be served from any company. Ad networks don't need to interoperate. But if a user…

>How is this different than having all ad publishers integrating with Google Token? Presumably you wouldn't want to be locked into a proprietary platform that can raise fees once it has an effective monopoly.

@hudon - it's a blockchain protocol, so BAT will be bound by the rules of the token as well. I.e. it won't be able to do any gatekeeping on who uses the system and for what purpose, or do any other monopolistic practices.

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#42

Post by hudon »

kolinko wrote: post #41
Jabanga wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How is this different than having all ad publishers integrating with Google Token? Presumably you wouldn't want to be locked into a proprietary platform that can raise fees once it has an effective monopoly.

@hudon - it's a blockchain protocol, so BAT will be bound by the rules of the token as well. I.e. it won't be able to do any gatekeeping on who uses the system and for what purpose, or do any other monopolistic practices.

> " it won't be able to do any gatekeeping on who uses the system and for what purpose"

Agreed. This is actually something the blockchain has that existing systems do not: censorship resistance. The ability to participate and not be shut down, fined, or jailed by the rule of law.

However, if you remove the need to be censorship resistant and assume that no one will use the ad publishing system for illegal activity, I'd be really curious to hear what you mean by "other monopolistic practices".

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#43

Post by slewis »

kgwxd wrote: post #5

Who would run a browser specifically designed to track and show ads? I can't imagine it ever being enough to support the ecosystem. Edit: And how is the locally gathered "attention" monitoring not exploitable by the people who get paid for the attention? Running a bunch of VMs that "pay attention" to the ad seems like a cheap thing to rig up.

The browser is ad-free and tracker-free by default and they've stated a few times that it will remain so. Business concerns aside, it really does significantly improve my mobile browsing experience (I'm using it on iOS).

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#44

Post by runeks »

Animats wrote: post #7

The usual trouble with micropayments applies - all the interest is from people who want to collect micropayments, not those who want to pay them.

And before the car was invented, all the interest in cars were from car makers -- the people just wanted faster horses.

And today, everyone uses the internet, but I doubt you'd find much interest in the internet pre-1990.

I, for one, would love to be able view a well-written article for, say, 10 cents, as opposed to paying for a $300/year subscription.

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#45

Post by problems »

homakov wrote: post #27
problems wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed an open source browser that anyone can bot doesn't mix well with the idea of paying people to just watch something... crypto currencies work because they don't rely on trust. This is precisely the opposite of that. The whole idea is fucked on premise right off the bat. Of course, Ethereum users snap it up at ICO within a single block for something like $33 million. There's way too much stupidity in that market…

It would be true, but someone like Brendan Eich mush be onto something, right? He can't risk all his reputation for just 33M?

Unless he's going to give everyone new computers which are locked down at the hardware level such that we can't clone and emulate them, there's really nothing he can do. This idea is doomed, plain and simple.

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#46

Post by Jabanga »

hudon wrote: post #39
Jabanga wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How is this different than having all ad publishers integrating with Google Token? Presumably you wouldn't want to be locked into a proprietary platform that can raise fees once it has an effective monopoly.

How is that different than being locked into the BAT? Brave decides how much BAT will get you an ad spot right?

A blockchain platform can be designed to not give the developer direct control over things like pricing, or anything at all. I don't know if that is what Brave is planning with its ad platform mind you, but it's certainly possible, and would be a differentiator only possible by building on top of a distributed ledger. A good example would be the blockchain itself, where every cost users incur, like transaction fees, is determined by end-user action (e.g. the miners and users), rather than through collusion by some set of owners.

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#47

Post by sneak »

jazoom wrote: post #36
sneak wrote: post #29

Let's not forget who is behind this: Brave, a company founded by Brendan Eich, who was forced to resign from his leadership position at Mozilla when it came to light that he is a bigot that does not believe that gay people should have equal human rights. Enrich bigots at your own risk. PS: I encourage you to tweet gifs of boys kissing at him; each time I do he writes me a missive in DM and re-blocks me.

Let's not encourage people to harass someone.

Tweeting harmless gifs is not harassment.

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#48

Post by jazoom »

sneak wrote: post #47
jazoom wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not encourage people to harass someone.

Tweeting harmless gifs is not harassment.

Anything can be harassment if it's unwelcome, and you are certainly aware that your pestering is unwelcome. He keeps blocking you and you keep creating fake accounts. In what world is that not harassment?

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#49

Post by richdougherty »

Taek wrote: post #6
kgwxd wrote: post #5

Who would run a browser specifically designed to track and show ads? I can't imagine it ever being enough to support the ecosystem. Edit: And how is the locally gathered "attention" monitoring not exploitable by the people who get paid for the attention? Running a bunch of VMs that "pay attention" to the ad seems like a cheap thing to rig up.

I have been hoping for a long time that browsers could use cryptocurrency to monetize publishers through methods other than advertising. Was very glad to see Brave pairing a browser with cryptocurrency (though I don't know how they will handle the scalability issues), and then very disappointed to see that it's not actually replacing ads, but instead encouraging users to watch them.

To build on what you're saying, I'd also like to pay publishers for content instead of viewing advertising. However, advertising has two useful features.

1. It provides a default way of paying publishers without any action by the consumer (i.e. the see an ad if they don't set up a payment system)

2. It establish a price for viewing the content, (i.e. the price that an advertiser would pay to show you an ad)

For reason 1, I can see how it is necessary to have an advertising option as a default to get the ecosystem rolling.

However I really, really hope that users would get the option of paying publishers directly instead of seeing ads. This is where reason 2 comes into play, it provides a market price for us to pay for the content we consume - just pay what an advertiser would pay.

Re: BasicAttentionToken Roadmap 1.0

#50

Post by hudon »

Jabanga wrote: post #46
hudon wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that different than being locked into the BAT? Brave decides how much BAT will get you an ad spot right?

A blockchain platform can be designed to not give the developer direct control over things like pricing, or anything at all. I don't know if that is what Brave is planning with its ad platform mind you, but it's certainly possible, and would be a differentiator only possible by building on top of a distributed ledger. A good example would be the blockchain itself, where every cost users incur, like transaction fees,…

> A blockchain platform can be designed to not give the developer direct control over things like pricing, or anything at all

The developers don't control the price... It's a market between brave/publishers/users.

Are you saying Google's engineers would be able to affect the price? That possibility has no affect on the product's success. That's like saying Amazon engineers can go and change the price of items so we should replace Amazon with a blockchain.

Post reply on HN