Does anyone know why Optimism says that the right amount to reward public goods is with profit equal to impact? I'm trying to ground that idea 

Is there anyone from Optimism here on farcaster?

https://abundances.substack.com/p/how-crypto-solves-the-problem-of-public-goods-8ae7125459a8

The only problem is externality pricing.

Building https://negationgame.com

a jiraffe on the internet • nf.td/morereese

Depends on the accounting standards you use, but ya I'd agree with that directionally. I haven't given much thought to profit vs revenue realization in a public goods context tbh. I'll have to take a closer look at the article you shared.

but if that's the case then you should distribute revenue, not profit, right?

I don't have much Optimism context, but my initial impression is it reminds me of the Satoshi Nakamoto quote about the price of a commodity gravitating toward its production costs.

seems like an intuitive ideal to strive for 
"value received = value provided"

imho, opposite interpretation to the possibility of toll-gating a public good to extract actual market value via revealed consumer preference. but I wouldn't say profit, it'd be growth of the entire market that's attributable to that, and that's really only one definition of "how good" in finance, not other terms.

velodrome & aerodrome
optimism delegate & grant council member

lore @optimism | ex: @coinbase | views are my own | what if it all worked out? 