Its not a case of SAFE being the only platform, just an attractant to SAFE, to try the SAFEnetwork or even move over to it. In the early stages I’d say most who upload to SAFE will also upload to clearnet. The idea is to give them incentive to try the SAFEnetwork rather than just & only go to say youtube
Well it would be amazing if PtP became the feature that by itself was world changing 
That’s why we should test it when test-safecoin comes out. Then it is still a test network. Then evaluate it at that point and see if its worthwhile doing more tests when live. Its not like anyone is going to make hundreds of coins from it in the first few months and the test safecoin would confirm that.
But remember that it is not just an incentive to benefit the uploader, but essential for the health of the network, especially in the first year or two. If we don’t attract content that people want to view then SAFE will just remain a smallish network mostly used for safe storage/backups and have little farming. Initially farmers need content people want to get. It’ll make coins for farmers so much more than any uploader.
Trouble is, you can’t “test” (as in: pretend) to use money. A game of monopoly is not an actual marketplace (unless there is a parallel with the way I and my friends would play it, of changing the rules and taking all the money and real estate).
But you can see the kind of rates that a coin is generated for PtP. The test in test-safecoin is so they can confirm the coins are not being generated too fast and algorithm needs adjusting.
Even when the network goes live there will be plenty of updates in the first year, so plenty of opportunity to fix/remove PtP if it proves to be creating the dire consequences that some have said would happen. Its not like once its there, nothing can be done. Remove one line of code and its disabled, then push out the update.
"Beyond release MaidSafe, either alone or working in partnership with other developers, will start to create some of features below that will offer both developers and end users access to some exciting new tools, such as:
Pay the producer"
I am unclear, will PtP be implemented after the full release of the SAFE network or before…during the testing of safecoins in Beta? Will PtP be implemented in partnership with app developers (or alone) meaning at the app level or will it be added to the core level on the test or live network? If PtP is tested at the core level “beyond release” and is later removed, won’t people have the option to not upgrade to continue their PtP profits?
I guess from that we can conclude that its in flux. Those goals are just that and subject to adjustments.
So lets wait and see. It will have to be done on the main network whether its a test netowrk or live, since any test using a fork will be questionable at best.
426 posts and nobody notices the poll is weighted in favour of a “yes” answer? There are 2 options for yes and 1 for no…basically a rigged poll that needs to be re-run to my mind.[quote=“happybeing, post:322, topic:5805”]
The lack of proper reasoning behind arguments that this should be dropped now
[/quote]
Lol…that’s rich…how long was I making this point to you? I even offered my help to all mods in this respect …and nothing! As you clearly want PtP, then I reckon its probably not in my interest, so will vote against it …(when a correctly structured non biased poll is run that is) How’s that for a reasoned argument?
No…no…no…it does not. There is no other option but to re-run the poll as far as I can see.
.
@Al_Kafir Where the hell have you been!?
On my latest 1 month suspension and I appeal to all users to watch what I say in future and keep your eyes out for when I’m next suspended and under what charge.
I am about to wreak havoc…believe me! 
Now that I think of it, the conversational tone has been unusually intelligent lately.
Well don’t be going too quick, exciting times here and good to have people to greet new folk and engage others in discussions! Welcome back
Lol…it’s started already eh?
I look forward to our future conversations, but please go easy on me… bear in mind that I’m only an ignoramus painter and decorator after all…heh heh…
I come from a working class background, and have done plenty of humble jobs.
Being an ignoramus is a state of mind, not an occupation.
I have mentioned that before, and yes the poll doesn´t point unambiguously to a overwhelming support. However, there is no reason to re-run this poll for it has 0 meaning in the decision process. Maidsafe apparently wants to have it, so why should there be another poll on nothing?
Anyways…good to have you back. Try not to get banned so soon, will you?
Then why did we have the poll in the first place?..lol[quote=“Artiscience, post:441, topic:5805”]
Anyways…good to have you back. Try not to get banned so soon, will you?
[/quote]
Thanks, much appreciated, though knowing what I was “officially” banned for in the first place would help! Lol…
To get a feeling for what the community thinks about the concept? Maybe? Maybe you ask @neo if you really find that interesting.
I guess because you broke the forum guidelines. Also asking would help if it is in your interest. I wouldn´t be surprised if you broke forum guidelines 
10 posts were split to a new topic: PRE - Ok What are you on about
So, kat.cr gets paid for game of thrones movies… this model would enable the kat.cr’s of the world to more easily make money with safenet. while it might attract users, it won’t help safenet. it might help the coin price for a little while… but it won’t help in the long term.
Hello everyone,
I’ve been following the progress of MaidSafe for a while, as I’m very interested in the possibilities a decentralised Internet has for the music industry. In particular the potential it has to break down monopolies and cut through the layers of middlemen that the industry is particularly fond of creating; and making the connections between the artist and the audience as short and frictionless as possible.
My views are formed from my experience as a musician, artist manager, label owner, and from negotiating download service agreements with distributors, indies and major labels.
I work for a company called Linn: we make networked music systems and technology based on principles on open systems; so this whole project is very much up our street.
I’d like to add a few thoughts as to why PtP should not be implemented as currently proposed:
I believe that value of art—be it music, film, visual, or anything in between—should not be assigned at a network level, in the same way resources are. This would be to assign objective value to something which intrinsically has subjective value, through an arbitrary measure, such as file size.
An open market is an effective way of establishing subjective value, and as such the sell-price should be in the hands of the artist
Creative endeavours and making art can be cheap and quick, or it can be devilishly expensive and risky. There are as many different business models as there are sub-genres, so it is a mistake to impose one globally—or assume that one will become prevalent—be that pure PtP, pay-what-you-want, or a giant tip jar.
An example: the idea that recorded music is really just a marketing tool for live performance—and that the concert hall is the only place musicians can expect to get paid, or set their prices—is a romantic notion, but also a fallacy:
Many recorded works cannot be performed live; Many musicians cannot perform live; Some music cannot be performed live; Live music, although related, is not the same art-form as recorded music.
It’s a similar argument to: all movies should free to promote theatre. It’s a different art-form; there art artistic tools and a palette of materials that are distinct in each art form not available in the other. The same is true of recorded music vs live performance.
MaidSafe should not seek to impose a particular business model on artists, but give them flexibility to choose their own.
Establishing who the artist is is difficult. In, the case of music, the artist is rarely a single person or entity. Often there are multiple artists involved, and it’s not always the individual performing the work that can be considered the primary artist.
Even setting aside—very common—intellectual property (IP) licensing agreements like simple record deals (where the owner of the recorded music IP is not the artist), the most basic and grassroots music projects are, more often than not, collaborations between artists. E.g. a band; with each individual contributing to the composition, and a single member composing the lyrics.
Additionally, in my quite extensive experience, the first uploader of a work to music services such as this is most likely not be the original artist, but be a representative, or record company. This is notwithstanding the file-sharing scenario of course.
With a goal of a decentralised music industry achieved, we would most likely see significant simplification of commonplace contractual relationships and chains, however they will not be reduced to a the basic level modelled by a PtP scheme; Particularly if it has no way of accounting for joint ownership of IP, or transfer of IP, which is problematic insomuch as it does not take account of real-world, human relationships which are unlikely to change, even if the industry structures currently imposed above them undergo wholesale revolution.
As a little aside, assigning the value of art based on file size is inefficient and a poor use of resource. File size and quality cannot be linked. For example, a losslessly compressed music file, would be worth less than its uncompressed equivalent, despite having identical content.
If you will indulge me, i’d like to present an alternative approach, comprised of three layers. (And please excuse some of the somewhat nascent terminology here).
This is SAFE network as conceived, without the PtP facility, serving as the infrastructure to a decentralised record industry.
This is where a music platform is created allowing artists and musicians to determine their sell-price, with smart contracts dealing with—potentially complex—obligations arising from artist collaboration or other business and contractual relationships.
Different competing platforms could also emerge, be them pure single artist distribution with more raw pricing with the assumed risk/reward, or say co-operative models where artists pool resource and then establish equitable royalty distribution amongst members.
The platform layer would also be the preserve of the music/art metadata—again another complex yet critical issue—and could also provide an avenue for some form of arbitration, measures of trust etc.
This is where services such as Spotify, Tidal and the like set up shop. And of course other kinds of broadcasters, and music services.
Rather than being monopolising middlemen as they tend toward currently, they focus on and compete in what they do best: curation, user experience and financial services. They are there to provide an effective end-user experience and smooth out the bumps of price fluctuation and complexities of platform layer access.
Curators would be able to set and present their own buy-price, along with other parameters, to the platform layer based on their own business model and strategy.
The centralised nature of the internet has lent itself to domination by corporations that reap huge financial rewards by offering advertising alongside creator’s content; whereas the creator is hardly rewarded at all.
Let’s make sure we don’t fall into a similar trap with MaidSafe and the approach to the arts.
The solution is decentralisation, but in a form that hands genuine control back to the artist. This is what we should be seeking to achieve, and not simply a proxy for it.
Jim
It’s been a while since the forum hasn’t been submerged by a sea of PtP threads. As you’ll see, it’s a polarizing subject .
I had this to say last time (micro pay-walls).
In short, it’s simply to allow to set a price on any piece of public content. The price needs to be paid before the data can be downloaded.
It won’t stop pirating content, but if the price is fair and the process simple, it wouldn’t need to.