interesting article that created somewhat of a stir (ie backlash) among substack people last week talked about how backing financialization into the act of of content creation is flattening written content out across the board

everyone's a writer, they're just the same kind of writer, producing the same kind of writing

farcaster has different & related issues: we have less people working on content creation, but its almost all monetized from the jump. My own newsletter included. we also have projects financializing the entire network, every post (in theory) could be created with the goal of making money. 

This is quite interesting, because unlike substack, we don't have a large audience of costumers for that content, whether newsletters | podcasts | posts. so why are we monetizing it?

interesting article that created somewhat of a stir (ie backlash) among substack people last week talked about how backing financialization into the act of of content creation is flattening written content out across the board

everyone's a writer, they're just the same kind of writer, producing the same kind of writing

farcaster has different & related issues: we have less people working on content creation, but its almost all monetized from the jump. My own newsletter included. we also have projects financializing the entire network, every post (in theory) could be created with the goal of making money. 

This is quite interesting, because unlike substack, we don't have a large audience of costumers for that content, whether newsletters | podcasts | posts. so why are we monetizing it? 

https://www.readfeedme.com/p/the-machine-in-the-garden

i did not realize substack has a whole network going on and people are consuming writing via the substack feed itself, etc. nnfeel like this essay injected me into a whole world i knew nothing about lol