Where does the content reward money come from?

[smacz]

Since we must rely on a “use-value” business model, let’s explore the alternatives that are out there that are based around this model. This is getting into the nitty-gritty of the App rewards system - but we must do so in order to determine where content reward money comes from.

First - and most heinous of all - is the advertisment/data collection model. The software is free (as in any use-value model) but the use that the software generates data that is sent to the application developers, used by them and/or sold to advertisement agencies. This way the software is free, but the use of that software creates revenue for the company. This is the “you are the product” business model and is to be avoided at all costs.

Next, as you described, there is the Pay Per GET model that is exclusive to the Network we’re creating here.

The application developer rewards are seen as a good start to pay creators of applications on the app popularity, measured via its use. This design incorrectly identifies the measure of use as the number of GET requests the app carries out.
– RFC 0012

As you and many others have pointed out, although at face value measuring by GETs may appear to be straightforward and simple, it is subject to a number of attacks.

Among these attacks is the notorious Stuffing the GET Requests Attack (I think you called it the “Circlejerk Attack” - I still lmao when I see that). These attacks are invisible to the user - as there are no (monetary/visceral) repercussions to the user experience when these types of attacks are being launched. This type of attack has many variations, and can safely be described as a fundamental flaw in this type of system.

There is, however, a third option. I’ll let my colleagues explain the Pay Per PUT model:

@bcndanos

It’s a big flaw bring an income to app developers for GET request. IMHO, I think is better to bring this reward for PUT operations … This way there’s no “Game the System”. Otherwise there will be a lot of botnets doing “auto-getter”.

@dyamanaka

Do you remember arcade machines? They require coins/tokens to play.

What if the App earns “based” on PUT requests?

Online Game Example

• When personal data is PUT through the APP, ([save the] high score, character stats, items, etc…) the player is charged Safecoin by the Network as normal.

• The personal data is owned by the consumer, and therefore does not burden the App with storage costs.

• At the same time, [the] PUT “revenue” is directly accounted for using this method.

@DavidMtl

In other words the network says to the dev: “Thank you for giving me new data, here’s your cut.”

@DavidMtl

A PUT request would have an extra header that contains the ID of the app [wallet]. This header would be filled by the Safe app launcher whenever an app makes a call for a PUT request.

@DavidMtl

It can’t be abused because the PUT request cost more than the reward gives.

@dyamanaka

I’m biased because I will be a farmer. I favor rewarding Apps for sending me data compared to Apps that punish my bandwith with GETS.

So as you can see, not only is this sustainable, but it also effectively eliminates abuse by pricing the reward far below the cost of generating the reward.

However does this system manage to retain the “good sides” of the ecosystem that we have been outlining? Aspects such as retaining free GETs for both data and software, allowing Apps to generate revenue based on “use value”, and encouraging the flow of currency between the three entities - the Client, Network Pool, and App?

P.S. Refer to my older post for more links on the Pay Per PUT model.