Farcaster

Hi Casters. I promised a follow up to yesterday's post on AI being the native business model for content. Here is that follow up post

Hi Casters. I promised a follow up to yesterday's post on AI being the native business model for content. Here is that follow up post https://avc.xyz/minting-is-the-native-business-model-for-web3-and-maybe-ai-too

I appreciate this might be in the next post, but are there any examples in the wild of a median user revealed preference to own their “own” interest graph data (or even do micropayments)?

weird internet kid. helping Creators with /seemore. yapping on /okbanger. curating in /cameron + pdfproject.org | dev + veteran + HBS. 
seemore.tv/cameron 🫡

Users might not care (yet) but creators do.
Users that care about a creator's content will happily pay for it.
Other users might not pay directly for the content but they pay with attention which can be monetized and creators can be compensated for it.

The model hasn't been cracked yet but we can experiment and learn

The open web is dead, long live the open web. ⌐◨-◨

Building /warpcast and /farcaster

— gabrielayuso.com

Re. #4:

YouTube's rev share is an example of this. YT is the web2 platform with the lowest take rate. YouTubers get a cut of the Premium subscription and the ads based on video watch-time and such.  This type of model could be replicated in web3 perhaps with even lower take rates.

Re. #2:

Anecdotal data but there are a few podcasts I listen to that were dropped by their networks so they started a Patreon model to let listeners pay. A couple of them actually quit their day jobs and focused on podcasts since they can now make a living out of it. (They make more from Patreon than network + ads).

Agree with Point #1

Disagree with Point #2 - Users complain about paying for Creators stuff (and any stuff really) all the time.

#3 is true in theory, but again that's why I asked for examples in the wild.