I’m happy if JZ can make tons of money. I just think it’s unfair that he or any producer gets double paid. It’s the double payment and attempting to know how to be fair to all is what’s troublesome to me. Piracy is a factor but just how big a factor is hard to predict. Just how SAFE will impact behaviors, governments, the economy, etc. is hard to predict. So producing algorithms to make things fair and to incentivize content is extremely difficult. Therefore, I think it’s beyond the purpose and scope of SAFE.
We should ask ourselves, “Will NOT having this feature cause the SAFE network to fail? Could the SAFE infrastructure still function?” Safecoin should only be used as incentive to support the network infrastructure. SAFE cannot exist without farmers.
Can the SAFE infrastructure function without the system paying producers? Yes.
And here’s source of hot debate. Can the SAFE infrastructure function without the system paying developers? I think the answer is yes.
Someone made a comment that farmers should be the only ones being paid in safecoin. After an initial jolt in the brain, I tend to agree with this assessment. I believe the pay-to-produce/pay-the-producer idea stems from the fact that SAFE pays the app developers so why not content providers? I think we need to step back and discuss if developers should be paid by the system. I think they can be paid by the free market as well.