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

Mercury Protocol: Communication Platform Built on the Ethereum Blockchain

mercuryprotocol.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 64 posts

Re: Mercury Protocol: Communication Platform Built on the Ethereum Blockchain

#51

Post by TylerE »

sliken wrote: post #47
dmitrygr wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But YOU wouldn’t pay to participate in a place where they can do that :)

If HN wasn't financially viable would people pay $0.10 to post? Would $0.10 per post decrease participation? Would $0.10 per post significantly offset the cost of running HN? Would $0.10 be enough to improve the forums, maybe have it notify you when your comment was replied to?

No, because a webforum is not exactly difficult to replicate. The users would all move to whatever free alternative popped up.

Re: Mercury Protocol: Communication Platform Built on the Ethereum Blockchain

#52

Post by Buge »

dmitrygr wrote: post #22
atomical wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about messaging, but paying per comment would be a really interesting idea. There are a lot of people out there who are very aggressive about posting in tabloid and newspaper comment sections. The comments are usually so argumentative, angry, and spiteful that I have to think that just having the comment itself appear on the page is worth quite a lot to those people.

But YOU wouldn’t pay to participate in a place where they can do that :)

There have been a number of websites with a fee to create an account, to prevent spam. Metafilter, Something Awful, Bitcoin Wiki previously.

There are also sites meant to be exclusive with fees $1000 and up https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/26/15407144/exclusive-social...

I've also heard proposals of email readers charging fees that senders have to pay, to stop spammers from being able to send them anything. Sometimes it's a computation fee instead of a monetary fee, a proof of work to rate limit spammers.

Re: Mercury Protocol: Communication Platform Built on the Ethereum Blockchain

#53

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

knrz wrote: post #46
dmitrygr wrote: post #15

I read the paper. Still not sure how this solves anything besides transferring wealth from the gullible to the authors: * Noted are the transactions-per-second limits, but solution is missing behind some handwaving * Lots of talk of fees for doing things like sending messages and lots of mentions of "premium" offerings. This is not a free messaging app (which means likely nobody will use it and the network effect wil…

I came to understand it as users of the app willing to put a price on their visual attention, giving advertisers the ability to bid on users' attention based on the users' own tolerances, and then it all becoming an ad bidding network. Except the marketers would pay you money (I guess, the coin) to show you the adds, and not say, a TV network. I'd probably put a high price to my attention — $5 per second. If I get an…

I'm quite positive this EXACT idea (pay people to watch ads) was implemented by more than one dot com fucked company around 2000. I hypothesize this scheme will be as successful.

It's kind of amazing to me how the current blockchain/ICO bubble is almost an exact repeat of the original .com bubble. Back then, it was anything and everything "on the internet", and now it's anything and everything "on the blockchain". Of course, some of today's biggest companies were birthed from that .com bubble, but the vast, vast majority of them crashed and burned. I suspect the same will be true of the blockchain bubble.

Re: Mercury Protocol: Communication Platform Built on the Ethereum Blockchain

#54

Post by otp124 »

knrz wrote: post #46
dmitrygr wrote: post #15

I read the paper. Still not sure how this solves anything besides transferring wealth from the gullible to the authors: * Noted are the transactions-per-second limits, but solution is missing behind some handwaving * Lots of talk of fees for doing things like sending messages and lots of mentions of "premium" offerings. This is not a free messaging app (which means likely nobody will use it and the network effect wil…

I came to understand it as users of the app willing to put a price on their visual attention, giving advertisers the ability to bid on users' attention based on the users' own tolerances, and then it all becoming an ad bidding network. Except the marketers would pay you money (I guess, the coin) to show you the adds, and not say, a TV network. I'd probably put a high price to my attention — $5 per second. If I get an…

It's probably difficult to prove that the human actually saw the ad. I would just have a script 'view' as many ads as possible and earn the $

Haven't read the paper to see if they solved that concern though.

Re: Mercury Protocol: Communication Platform Built on the Ethereum Blockchain

#55

Post by shp0ngle »

Is there an ICO? If it is an ethereum app, there has to be an ICO. It's the only way

Edit: color me surprised, there is not an ICO. They even want to have working app first. Well that's new. Mostly those apps just write a whitepaper, accept money and then do nothing.

>According to Ryan Ozonian, the CEO of Dust and a leader of the Mercury Protocol, the only way for people to earn tokens at the outset will be through participation. In the future, though, he says there will be an opportunity to purchase them.

Edit2: oh there will be an ICO of course though

>Roadmap

>Phase 1: Dust (Q3 2017)

>We will build version 1.0.0 of the Mercury Protocol, conduct the token sale, and integrate GMT into Dust. The Mercury Protocol will remain closed-source at this stage.

Ummm ok. Good for them I guess. Let's throw more money at broken blockchain protocols!

Re: Mercury Protocol: Communication Platform Built on the Ethereum Blockchain

#56

Post by 4010dell »

Do blockchain people have any other arguments other than decentralization, security, probable future monetary incentive. These arguments although sound have become cliched, every whitepaper has the same arguments, same methodology, same roadmaps, substitute noun and you have got a whole new whitepaper. It's the lack of ideas of use of blockchain.

Ohh that business is centralized, ohh that guy is making so much money off it, ohh they sell user data, ohh they got hacked !! lets decentralize that business, lets make some crypto money while we can ( and unload it on suckers when crypto hits high ). we got hacked (oops) ...it wasn't us it's the underlying layer under the layer on which our "smart" contracts are based.

I don't care if zuck or anyone is making millions for a centralized product ..he should be he made that product. It was needed that's why people use it. Data isn't safe with centralized network, they misuse it ..heck i have got a choice to share what i want, i can control it. Maybe educating yourself on what and what not to share is better. Networks get hacked ..use 2FA, go MI6. Not everything comes with lifetime guarantee.

what if I don't want to make money off your blockchain protocol or ICO or early adopter incentive or what not.

I am curious to know reason other than mentioned above on why should anyone care about blockchain based protocols/networks etc.

Post reply on HN