Bitcoin Forum

Next month, Synereo is releasing their beta social media application.  If you don't know, Synereo is, at its core, a decentralized, monetized content delivery network.  By allowing users to directly own their data, thus cutting out the middleman (aka Mark Zuckerberg), Synereo passes on the profits to its userbase.  This is referred to as the "attention economy".  As users view and refer ("like") content coming into their personalized streams, they generate a reputation score and earn money.  The attention economy is powered by AMPs on a Casper blockchain.  All settlement is done in AMPs, but the user will have the option of earning any currency they wish.

My question to you is, "Would you change your social media network if you could actually earn money by simply using another network?"

Personally, I think this model has a great, widespread appeal to both the privacy oriented crypto crowd and the general market populace.  Who wouldn't want to earn money by doing something they already spend time doing?

Tsu has been doing that over a year and they have been a lot of social sites that pays just to use their site just like they do on facebook,one site that is also doing that,that pays through crypto currency is startpeeps own by jens,they had a thread here,looks profitable though ..

The answer to your question depends on what I would find on that new social media network. E.g. on facebook or twitter I'll get huge number of people and a lot of attention if I'm doing it right. On LinkedIn I can find the right people if I need something, and vice versa.
If I can find only the same 50 or let's say 200 people chatting with each other (or with themselves on different nicknames), that's not much use even if I get paid for being bored to death there. Tagbond is a good example for this.

Depends on how famous it becomes and the user base it is able to acquire, the whole point of social media networking is you get exposed to a lot of people and it helps you achieve whatever it is you're trying to through these channels and if Synereo is able to do that than people will join and making some money for doing things you already do will be an added advantage.

See this: http://cointelegraph.com/news/synereo-attention-economy-and-distributed-cloud-to-deliver-next-generation-social-networks

I am in the midst of studying/researching Synereo's white paper, Hangout videos, and blogs. Some of my initial thoughts are here (https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/42rvm3/truth_about_ethereum_is_being_banned_at/).

One of the salient questions to answer is if there is something about doing it decentralized that will make it more compelling than those sites you mentioned.

Another critically important question is whether Synereo attention model will work well.

And third whether the attention model is comprehensive or instead limiting.

I do not understand why Greg Meredith has been asked to talk about SpecialK and be the co-developer in the context of the Casper block chain consensus model overhaul for Ethereum (which I have asserted is fundamentally flawed). Even Greg admits in the Synereo whitepaper that their algorithms don't attain (and don't need to attain) a global consensus (http://www.synereo.com/whitepapers/synereo.pdf#subsection.2.2.8). So this has already caused me to doubt whether any of this is well thought out (although the attention model is orthogonal to Casper afaik). I need to complete my research before I can comment with full understanding.

I have very strong doubts about whether people will want to get paid from a social network, because I think the earnings will be so small that they will be offended. They join social networks for greater reasons, such as sharing, interacting, etc.. Instead I think you need to give them a better experience of what they really joined for. Some people do earn money now using Facebook to sell and promote things. The revenue opportunities are othogonal. So far I thinking Greg Meredith is trying shoehorn one attention (math) model onto a very diverse social human phenomenon. But I need to study more to see if I find some reason to think he is really onto a powerful concept. Synereo is extremely complex to analyze from all facets including technical and markets. I am expecting that what we really need is unbounded experimentation (free market) of models (but what would that really mean and would it be decentralized and do we really need decentralized).

Again if this is just a speculator thread and you just want to sell the slogan and ignore the details, then please tell me so. Then I will keep my future comments in my own little echo chamber else where.

Edit: the two posts preceding mine are actually quite insightful and astute.

Edit#2: the poll is worded in a very misleading manner. Some people may wish to vote No not because they don't like the money but for other reasons, such as the money being so insignificant as to the reason they use a social network. The author of the OP seems to be overly enthused on having found the greatest thing since sliced bread, but he may be in for a reality check.

Does anyone have any data on what users typically earn from these sites?

Let me attempt a "back of the napkin" guesstimate.

Normally ads pay between $1 - $10 per CPM (thousand impressions), but it can be even less if there are very low CTR, low sales conversions/branding recall, or too many ads on same page. For starters let's assume the revenue distribution is egalitarian (i.e. uniformly distributed among users), and assume a typical user views 100 ads per day. So that is $0.10 to $1 per day in revenue for each user. That isn't even a third world wage any more.

Perhaps with multiple ads on the same page and very well targeted ad content, we could raise that by a factor of 10. Then it might be worthwhile to someone in a third world country, but it doesn't seem like it will ever be worthwhile to someone in a developed nation. Okay $300 per month might be worth it to some kids who live with their parents in a developed nation, but it isn't going to be participating in the significant portion of the economy.

It just seems to me to be economically implausible as a motivation to seek out a big chunk of the economics of social network. Social networks are driving much larger economics that are the derivative sales that come from networking.

Now a concept such as Synereo doesn't have to be about revenue for users. It could be focused on achieving other goals that are important to users of social networks. So far Greg Meredith hasn't articulated that clearly to me.

I will be trying to figure this out. It is a complex mental challenge.

I would appreciate all the information and opinions I can read from others about what other social networking experiments are doing and their results. As much data as possible please.

In my experience that's too high by a factor of 10 - 100 for CPM ads. Maybe CPA you might get closer to $1 per action, but they're generally pretty low quality ads, which you wouldn't want on a social network.

Are you sure? I am saying $1 - $10 paid per 1000 displays of the banner ad. During the dot.com bubble is was as high as $40. Has it declined now below $1?


This doesn't look good:

"tsu is an invite-only platform that rewards social activity for all users"

Last time I looked into this (a good 5 years ago, mind) you'd be lucky to get $0.4 CPM on google adsense, which is the highest paying service.

You mean for the website owner's earnings. That is after Google takes its cut right. So figure the advertiser is paying roughly $1 CPM. Synereo intends to cut out the middle man.

Please note that the $300 per month upper end of the guesstimate is for targeting adults in Western countries with higher paying jobs that enable them to spend money. But that $30 - $300 monthly guesstimate is not worth their time to waste viewing 100 - 1000 ads per day on a social network.

The Western teenager demographic and third world users that have less money to spend on products advertised, thus the ads pay less. So that would not be $300 for a teenage or third world user. More likely in the realm of $10 per month. And that is a waste of their time as well.

Paying users to view ads is not an economic model (ditto paying users to solve CAPTCHAs such as for crypto coin faucets). If it was, many sites would be doing it successfully and teenagers and third world would be employed doing it.




Paying a site for advertising since it aggregates users and earns $1 - $10 per user per month is a viable economic model:

I will be making some comments as I am reading the Synereo white paper, and the coherent, holistic analysis will hopefully follow later after I am done reading the entire white paper (note Elokane already admitted to me that the white paper is missing some critical algorithms such as the ability to filter out low/zero information/entropy actions such as when users Like all their friends' timeline posts irrespective of value of the content that was shared).


Unfortunately I explained a dilemma:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1340057.msg13670558#msg13670558

If the users store their files on their own computer, then there is no way to enforce legal orders, thus the Synereo protocol will be banned by (centralized gateway) hosts. And if Synereo doesn't allow users to host content from their computers, then user's can't resist government regulation of their activities. Besides serving files from user computers over ISPs that have asymmetrically low upload (relative to download) bandwidth is a Tragedy of the Commons as some ISPs effectively pay for other ISPs' lower upload allowances (which is why Bittorrent is throttled/banned by many ISPs, which thus helps drive the Net Neutrality politics that will enslave us in internet taxation ... which btw I pointed out to Bittorrent in 2008, I offered a solution, and they apparently ignored me...click link above to read more).

So the point is that hosting illegal content is a non-starter. And thus hosting (at least high-bandwidth or copyrightable) content on user computers is a non-starter.

If we are going to find utility in Synereo, it has to come from gains in user's sense of value from the attention model, which is what I will be analyzing.

It is not clear if there is any advantage to it being decentralized (but I do hope to find one that matters to users). Mostly the masses don't care about decentralization ideology. They care about the value they get out of the social experience (and not just monetized value). However, we are already seeing where the values of certains users (e.g. musicians) are in conflict with the values of certain music promotion sites such as SoundCloud and Spotify. I have also been analyzing these music promotions sites (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1340057.msg13672053#msg13672053). There are many. And that might be the more important trust that is being violated, not the reporting to the government which I think is not an actionable cause for most people:


I didn't know this:



Please refer to prior discussion here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/42rvm3/truth_about_ethereum_is_being_banned_at/

Note I am ideologically in support of a decentralized concept. But economics rules ideology. So let's see where the chips fall in terms of analysis. As the preface to the white paper says, a manifesto is not sufficient. One must also have an economic plan.

Economics and game theory seems to be one of my forte or at least interests/hobbies, so let's take a tangent and start by analyzing economically Ello's business model:



The problem is that due to centralized control, Ello is putting itself in a position where it has to compete against others who might want certain features which ameloriate other features which Ello has a vested revenue interest. It is simply impossible for a centralized, top-down controller to remain impartial. Some users may want some feature which provides some necessarily benefit to those users but in some other way actually bypasses the need to buy a different feature from Ello. These users presumably won't be free to program a plug-in that destroys Ello's revenue stream, just as no one is allowed to program a App plugin for Facebook which displays advertising.

Ello has just shifted the enslavement problem from ads to paid features.

And their claim of anonymity and defense against national security gag orders is BULLSHIT. They can't guarantee those attributes being a centralized entity. Furgetaboutit.

So right off at the start, we see Ello's principle founder is not thinking clearly or is disingenuous.

Not to mention that a site which charges for features can't scale as well as one that gives everything users want away for free. Nevertheless Facebook and SoundCloud are also restricting and harming some (but is it significant enough?) users as well, so maybe there is a better balance. Is it Synereo's decentralized design? I will continue the analysis.

I can say with near certainty that unless you offer some compelling feature where all their friends will want to join, users here in the Philippines will not be interested in leaving Facebook where all their friends already are.

---

Understand from the upthread guessimates (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1344997.msg13730114#msg13730114), that Tsu's and GetGems' business model is fundamentally flawed (probably also in other ways):

YES! I would change my social media network and may even delete may fb account :)

Seen something like this before but didn't make it big like fb. if this is going to be big and has shared by thousands, this could actually make it and may even kill facebook.
There will always be better one. how would you sell ads to this social media if you don't get to gather user info?

And if all your friends, customer, collegues, etc do not follow you, then you will be all alone (even if the site has a million users who are not people you relate to).

Your Fb contacts may not care about ideology. And they may like or at least not hate Fb as much as you apparently do. Hey I don't like the idea of centralized overlord either, but the fact is when I need to communicate to my connections, they are all on Fb.


Diaspora (now defunct):

---

---

You mean 100s of millions, else your contacts won't likely be there.


That is the analysis I am doing now. Stay tuned for future posts...I have also invited the Synereo lead dev to come here to this thread (he said he has been ill past couple of days)...

This section is excellent (click the link (http://www.synereo.com/whitepapers/synereo.pdf#page=8) and read it). But the devil will be in details.

Note even Stackexchange, this forum, and Reddit are attention economies (with the former and latter incorporating voting and comment threads so that users can impart their appraisals of relevance and accuracy).

For example, I get your attention when I bump posts to the top of thread. I also have a reputation (in some reader's opinion) that my posts are informative and valuable. However, some other readers hate my writing and think it is too verbose, technobabble, and/or rude (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg13731191#msg13731191) (please do click that link for a prime example!). So ideally my posts should only be seen by (get the attention of) readers who will value my posts. So an attention tool (hopefully automated) should detect which users don't want to see my posts and hide them. But you can't hide my posts when someone else replies to them and that other person happens to be someone that readers who don't want to read me, do want to read the user replying. So there is an unresolvable conflict in such a model of attention based on personal reputation.

This is essentially the MAJOR FLAW I see so far in Synereo's Reo attention model core concept. It conflates the attention economy with personal reputation. It seems an attention model will need to be much more complex than that. Any way, let me continue analyzing Synereo's model to see if I learn something that changes my conclusion.

I am thinking about models for an attention economy. Stackexchange and Reddit irritate me because they allow disrespectful (and spiteful, political, turf battles) downvoting instead of a system of community selection. There should instead be subcommunities I think, and you only comment in the communities that value you. That is the only way I see around the conflation of personal reputation and interleaved discussion. But I need to think that out more. Just a very rough idea for now.


The other thought I have is the yes in centrally controlled social networks the users are not in control of what they can do and how information is prioritized for them. But I am also thinking there doesn't exist only one attention model. Rather the number of attention models is as unbounded as is the diversity of human beings. Every human is unique (http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Algorithm_!=_Entropy)! (read my linked blog for elaboration on why that is so)

Thus I am thinking one of the fundamental flaws in Synereo may be the hard-coding of one attention model network wide.

---

So this assumes (roughly) that the actions of which content they attend to amongst my common friends with another person, determines the ranking of that person in terms of the prioritization of displaying that person's content to me.

That does not seem to have high informational value. My friends may not even have the same preferences that I do.

Perhaps Synereo is planning on determining who I have the most in common with in terms of preferences and do it either automatically or assisted by me, but I am still not sure if the actions of those people will best reflect my priorities and preferences because as Synereo's white paper admitted in the "Attention is selection for action" section that my circumstances determine my priorities on my attention.

It seems the fix is to allow reputation per agent to accrue to different genres on sharing, i.e. granular reputation. In other words, hashtags.

Again I am leaning towards that Synereo's attention model is flawed, even though their ideological and conceptual basis is admirable.

But let me finish the rest of the white paper...

Frankly speaking the AMPs seem to violate the correct logic about attention value not being about paying users. I am unwilling to be paid $1 - $10 per day to view 100 spams ads per day (notice how the ads here at Bitcointalk are very discreet and take only a small space between posts or on user's signature lines). AMPs crypto currency seems to be an appendage to drive another P&D scam to sell an ICO.

Afaics there is no reason to involve a monetary unit in the attention model. Advertising could instead become sponsored content that is desired by users (i.e. sponsorship paying the artist for its creation and then placing the sponsorship in the content, e.g. a Dominos pizza is delivered in the video). AMPs appears to be an ill conceived gimmick to drive speculation fever in a very risky, experimental project that might fail as Diaspora did (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1344997.msg13730800#msg13730800).

Besides the rest of the Synereo network operates on a decentralized, no-consensus model, which is the antithesis of a crypto currency which requires global consensus (http://www.synereo.com/whitepapers/synereo.pdf#subsection.2.2.8). Conflating Synereo with a crypto currency will thus end up forcing Synereo to be centralized (see my research in the Decentralization thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13720596#msg13720596) for why and also my formerly censored thoughts (https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/42rvm3/truth_about_ethereum_is_being_banned_at/) about why afaics the work that Synereo's Greg Meredith is doing for Ethereum's Casper consensus protocol is flawed and won't solve the inherent flaw in Ethereum w.r.t. to decentralization).


It is impossible to invent a PoW which derives from a decentralized, no-consensus network which isn't about consuming a resource and also achieve global consensus on the distributed ledger's (block chain's) Consistency due to the CAP theorem.

This is nonsense to claim you have such a PoW.

Edit#2: so on page 33 (#31) it is explained that it is not AMPs that are socially "mined" but rather Reo is socially mined and then can be perhaps some exchanged for AMPs. But this doesn't solve the problem that this will cause a divergence of consensus about the value of an agent's Reo score:

---

The entire point of an attention model is to remove the conflict in the community by making the communities more granular and eliminate the tension. I should be able to participate in multiple sub-communities and my posts to those communities should be relevant to the shared interests and attitudes of each sub-community.

I am leaning towards your model is fundamentally conceptually flawed for as long as it is including AMPs and Reo is not more granular than the monolithic agent.

Edit @ 30 minutes after post time: Ah now I see it mentioned that more granularity for Reo is contemplated:


Edit#3: So the only reason to use process calculi to model the network versus kinetic proofreading (think of Facebook's Like) is to incorporate AMPs:

I quickly read from page 14 to page 24 and this comment about Sybil attacks on Reo seems to be correct. Any user who has not acknowledged the Sybil agents (bots) will thus not receive their influence in terms of relative Reo score.

It has to be business friendly still just like facebook, maybe allowing businesses to create an app or pages as well. I think this is one of the feature that makes facebook very successful.
I was with myspace when facebook started and I ignore the first months but then I kept hearing it until i register a profile and my business but its too late since most of the URL are already taken.

At dinner tonight (we dined out, budget style), I asked my 26 year old filipina gf (we are in Mindanao) if there are any things she doesn't like about Facebook. She is on Facebook in her new Samsung J7 mobile phone app during all waking hours on our WiFi connection which she prefers instead of my old laptop because she sometimes its "hung" (meaning the laptop is so old and under-provisioned that it has to be rebooted frequently). The mobile phone can be enjoyed from the sofa, in bed, and the it is easy to rotate screen for a video and also accepting calls and reply to SMS is all conveniently in one hand held along with Playstore apps (which my WinXP laptop isn't configured to accept).

• Photos & videos of horrific vehicles accidents (e.g. motorcycle driver's head crushed under wheel of bus) which she is curious to look at but she wishes it was blocked from her Timeline feed.
• Naked and pornographic videos & photos, again which she might be induced to view when in front of her face, but she would prefer they not be displayed to her.
• That she can't always play a video or music in the Timeline and must click off to a website such as Google to view it.
• That people can add her to Groups without her permission which is annoying (and all her friends agree they hate this).

She mentioned what she likes about Facebook:

• Interacting & staying up-to-date on happenings with her friends.
• Sharing music.
• Sharing jokes, funny videos, cute dogs, babies, anything pink, etc.
• Posting photos, especially ones she alters with apps such as replacing her black hair with gold hair, and humorous or girly effects.
• She also of course loves Google Playstore where she finds new apps to do funny or girly effects with her video Camera and/or photos.

---

Furthering the above point:

---

Now that I have basically digested the Synereo white paper (not all the math formalisms are understood in minute detail which will require some more time for study, but I get the overall concept), I want to write down some of my thoughts about Synereo's design and in the context of how I am thinking about priorities for any major paradigmatic shift in social networks.

1. Per the post upthread where I elaborated, I do not think the attention model of a social network can be tied to Synereo's crypto currency AMPs, nor should it, nor will that be compatible with allowing each user to choose their own attention model. There may be a use for crypto currency in social networking but it is not to hard code an attention model for what is supposed to be an individual user choice paradigm for a social network. I suppose instead Synereo could offer their attention model as one of the variants users can choose, but I think it will be a failure for the reasons I stated upthread. I think we will need free market competition between attention models in order to find out what works well and what doesn't. Also I think this means we can't assume nodes obey some global process calculus.

2. Users will not run a social network hosted from their own decentralized home computers ephemerally connected by asymmetric bandwidth ISPs as is the initial planned focus on Synereo (http://www.synereo.com/whitepapers/synereo.pdf#subsection.2.3.2). Fugetaboutit. They will signup quickly (and/or download the mobile app) just like Facebook or any other mainstream social network. Thus they will have their data and nodes hosted and thus just fugetaboutit this nonsense about censorship resistance in the white paper (http://www.synereo.com/whitepapers/synereo.pdf#subsection.2.3.3), except perhaps in terms of encrypted sharing (but later the government will demand a global decryption key as they have for streaming encrypted voice and video communications in the USA, Uk and rest of the 5 Eyes countries (http://9to5mac.com/2015/11/02/apple-encryption-uk/)). See my prior post upthread for where I think this political-economic battle over private rights is headed.

3. The advantages that matter most to users which can only be gained from a decentralized structure (i.e. not the way existing social networks are structured) are the ability to control their own data and to choose their GUIs, apps, configuations, and even attention models. In other words, each user should be able to independently choose their own social network design, store the user's data independently of other users' data, and these user nodes should interact to exchange data, which each user node filters and stores locally the relevant bits to that user. Ideally, the entire platform should be programmable on top of some maximally generalized decentralized protocol layer.

4. The details about how to implement a maximally generalized decentralized protocol layer and define the potential motivation (economics) for all participants (users, service providers, cloud storage providers, developers) such that there isn't chaos and lack of focus so as to insure the end product converges to easy-to-use and compelling for all participants, seems to be at least on first contemplation mindbogglingly complex to distill, because there are competing/conflicting priorities in such a design. For example, a streaming music download provider must invest development resources to develop all the stop/start/pause/forward/rewind interactive functionality between the server and the client player, but then needs to somehow monetize both the bandwidth costs and the development investment, as well as attain an ROI that compensates for opportunity cost (not just a return of investment). Typically the streaming provider (e.g. SoundCloud, Spotify, etc.) would want to create a walled garden around the musicians who are uploading, the app developers who are calling their API, and the fans who are listening (e.g. through the provider's player and even embedded into provider's mobile app), so that it can extract some revenues on this ecosystem such as through a combination of advertising and/or music sales. One might propose microtransaction payments to the service provider for each song played, but this requires standardized APIs for all integration with the rest of the social network so that service providers become fungible (i.e. substitutable with each other) and in which case the service providers are reduced to competing on costs and thus can't attain a ROI to compensate opportunity costs for investing in innovation. Even if we say that users can use different service providers with their proprietary players (all fungibility embeddable in the social network Timeline), this doesn't resolve the issue of needing a standardized API for these providers to communicate fungible attributes (between all service providers) that users need in order to make an attention model more fine grained, e.g. for the music the genre and sub-genre of each track played/shared.

Thus it seems that any decentralized protocol will need to be too general and that interoption standards will emerge initially adhoc and then probably go through standardization via organizations such as the W3C.org. Similar to the browser wars of yore, we would repeat another wild west of adhoc experimentation and competing corporate offerings with the community settling eventually on the defacto standards that work best for all.

In other words, we would be creating a new decentralized protocol for the internet which would foster competition and participation instead of the walled gardens of Facebook, Twitter, Apple, etc...

Sounds exciting! Where do I sign up to create this?

Note I was listed as a contributor on the W3C standard for CSS2.1 (https://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/about.html#acknowledgements). I contributed to the either the multi-column or table specification (I contributed on both but I was only recognized on one afaik), given my past history at the dawn of deskstop publishing in the 1980s.

Correction: Diaspora is an ongoing project which was funded with $200,000 via Kickstarter (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mbs348/diaspora-the-personally-controlled-do-it-all-distr/) yet turned over to open source community development in 2012 (http://benwerd.com/2012/08/28/making-billions-of-dollars-from-the-federated-social-web/) (which some viewed as failure), but I don't like their protocol and message semantics:

https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Federation_message_semantics#Sharing_Notifications

Also it is written in Ruby on Rails and doesn't appear to be built on a clear separation-of-concerns design philosophy, i.e. the protocol should be formalized orthogonal to any particular implementation and language/platform of any implementation.

Note there was another white paper that had some similar ideas but without the formalization around process calculus:

http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-730/paper2.pdf
https://www.w3.org/2008/09/msnws/papers/decentralization.pdf

I am trying to research process calculus so I can better understand what that might improve over an adhoc protocol design. Note afaics, Greg Meredith did not incorporate any economic game theory analysis (http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ljp/poplawski_proposal_presentation.pdf#page=14) in his process calculus models (or perhaps the models don't need to care about that). I do not understand which properties have been proven by the process calculus model in the Synereo paper. I don't think they were mentioned, but I'll have to scan it again.

http://www.pst.ifi.lmu.de/Lehre/sose-2013/formale-spezifikation-und-verifikation/intro-to-pa.pdf

---

Some suggestions to Synereo of how to ship polished product sooner and free up more degrees-of-freedom to focus first on marketing strategy:

Don't do this:


There is no need to create the above "turnkey" (a term Greg Meredith uses often) software yourself. You only need to create and publish the open protocols.

Again rely on protocol specifications, not on implementations (and remember I am not yet sure if Greg Meredith's process calculi proposal is a protocol that can withstand all game theory or if it is an app level implementation of a monadic state transfer):


Which is what I had written in my prior post:

---

---

As I said upthread, ads do not pay enough for users to want to watch them, and you can't force a decentralized peer to watch even if you offer a payment. Worse yet, you can't even confirm the peer did watch even if they took the payment! For many game theory reasons (http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ljp/poplawski_proposal_presentation.pdf#page=14) like this, Synereo's white paper seems half-baked to me thus far.


Again I urge that read access is the first priority and write transportability is the job of the free market:


The following is not so damn difficult. The main thorny issue is certificate authority on public key exchange. The solution is a block chain registry as the certificate authority, e.g. Namecoin.:


Make sure your protocols are correct and fully specified before shipping implementation! Thus any errors are bugs deviating from protocol:


Which is what I had written in my prior post:

---

---

He wrote this in 2012 and is it still in beta vaporware?

Every attempt at a federated, decentralized social network has failed outright because either they committed the errors I mentioned in my prior post in this thread, or failed to scale and remain permissionless, trustless, decentralized because of what I wrote in the above quote. Refer to the following and note that App.net suffers the same economic problem as I described at the full post for the above, in that App.net is charging a subscription and thus it competes against the profit of the apps it includes.


Additionally subscriptions for social networking are not very popular:

http://blog.synereo.com/2015/03/27/how-amps-work/

1 Reply


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22Attention+Economy%22

https://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=%22Attention+Economy%22&gws_rd=ssl

What's your point?

I'm confuse about the wallets :) i can't even find how to store Synereo in my hard drive.
Can you please explain a little further here, I saw a thread about Synereo. i understand its just platform but you have a total of about 1 Billion AMPs?  I'm just too newbie here.  ;D

AMPs are currently stored on the Bitcoin blockchain utilizing the Omni protocol layer.  Use Omniwallet or Omnicore to store your AMP tokens.  Once the Synereo network goes live in a couple weeks, AMPs will have their own blockchain.

Synereo is up against someone who knows marketing and implementation of million user adopted software better than they do. And we didn't and won't ICO/premine/instamine, meaning that our network effects and adoption will blow theirs away. Synereo is a vaporware P&D so keep that in mind:

people could get rich off this if it works well social media is many peoples life mine is crypto lol

Synereo's beta will be released in a few weeks.

Just like Ethereum releases up to now, it will be software that doesn't work for anything real or meaningfully adoptable.

They are having fun inventing code that has no use case, because (as I had already explained) they don't even have the correct formulation of a use case economics and business model.

I will suggest you refer to my project's crowdfund to read the details on what I think a real business and ecosystem model is for this type of project.

I am less respectful than I would be, because they presold the AMP tokens. Thus for me it is scam just like Ethereum. That is my opinion. I don't hate them though. Afaik, they have not been egregiously deceptive, i.e. not like Dash.

Reality check:

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/what-happened-to-the-facebook-killer-it-s-complicated

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_software_and_protocols_for_distributed_social_networking

I think that trying to measure the potential for success, etc. based on part of a feature that values attention, is not very instructive.

Yes, some people might want to use the network for that reason, but very few.  It's the rest that need to be considered, and how they will come on board.

There are many "one-offs" that happen in reality that are not repeated, because the environment is never going to be the same again.  So how or why FB made it, and others didn't is subjective, and dependent on these other inputs.  Same thing with Tsu.

Neither of these, nor any other, can actually compare with what Synereo is, combined with the world that exists _today_.  The market is different, the level of tech saturation, etc.  FB was simply in the right place, at the right time, historically.

I agree with that.

Imo yes and no.

Yes because if we can earn money by just using social media sites, why not?

But no is due to the fact that facebook twitter and some other popular SMedia sites have already captured and monopolize the entire social media field of interest, so it is still quite hard for people to transisting to other Social media sites unless, if i can earn like $10 / day while just browsing then yes, but if even its $1/day, i would rather stay on fbook :P

That`s so nice of you not to hate them. What I like about the vaporware AMPs is that no one has to buy them and at the same time people like you have no possibility to hinder me to do so.
I can buy it as freely as I can ignore your T-Shirts. Freedom is awesome.

Well originally that was my thought too given I am a minanarchist. I was very defiant of 2112's attempt to help me and ridiculed his attempt to teach me that I was incorrect. Today I was reminded to PM him a "mea culpa".

Because the reality is that USA society (at least and probably simiilarly in other jurisdictions) has decided that snakeoil salesmen (i.e. hypesters and pumpers) have too much leverage over "unsophisticated, non-accredited" USA investors, and thus has adjudicated that the selling (and ostensibly promoting) of ICOs to USA n00bs (residents or expat citizens) even when promulgated by foreign entities. I understand a prison sentence is a possibility.

Meaning it is not freedom to allow murders and rapists. It is also not freedom to allow hypesters to prey on the ignorance of n00bs, or at least that is what society has decided. If the law changes, then we can talk about the new reality. Until then, I can't help create/code/develop freedom from prison. I suggest you go read the appropriate thread from start to finish:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg14546242#msg14546242

So the Synereo team is what exactly? Snakeoil Salesmen? Hypester? Pumpers?
And what has the "US Society" "decided" about libel?

Oh and how exactly does one compare an ICO to murder and rape?
I am confused, because at the ICO you can say "no" and not be harmed, while the point in murder and rape is that you can`t.
BTW, for the records, I am a Synereo ICO "victim" myself. Must be stockholm syndrome, that I feel fine so far and I would even if Synereo turned out to be a total failure, because...well, that`s the risk one takes when investing and I could not find a single hint a fraudulent behavior by the team so far.

I am no native english speaker, so I am in no way able to compete with your rhetorical skills, it`s just that I can`t stand unfairness and libel.
You will as usual have the last (many many) words, but maybe you should spend more time proving the world what a genius you are with a real finished project/product, instead of spending your time pretending to protect people from what your competition does (and to call you a "competitor" is actually pretty generous, as you haven`t delivered ANYTHING as far as I can tell).

Are you alleging that they are? What are the legal definitions of those terms?

I was talking about the general legal matter and informally summarizing my IANAL understanding of the securities law and the purpose for the existence of the law.

Do I think Synereo's ICO violated the law? Yes probably in my IANAL personal opinion. But that is just my opinion and I am free to express my opinion on a forum that exists to share opinions on matters such as these.


Why don't you explain precisely by citing the case law the relevance of your question. It appears to be irrelevant to what I wrote in the prior post and appears to be an attempt to scare me into not expressing my opinions.


On the abstraction notion of freedom. Society doesn't think we should be free to murder and rape. Society has also decided we should not be free to issue unregistered investment securities to "unsophisticated, non-accredited" USA investors. That is the law. Go complain to society if you disagree. It is not my opinion that matters.


Obviously.


I didn't make the law. Society did. Society ostensibly feels that you can purchase a gun to defend yourself if you don't want to be murdered or raped. And society ostensibly feels that n00bs lack the information to make informed investment decisions and are easily suckered into being victims and thus in effect are actually psychologically powerless because they were salivating over getting rich quickly and lost their objectivity.


The initial pump of Synereo was ostensibly very lucrative for the ICO investors. I am not surprised you are not crying. You are only angry now because punchbowl might be taken away.


Thanks for being an example how n00bs are fooled. You didn't even conceive of the fact that selling an illegal security is already a fraud. And also you didn't know the facts I have been explaining about how slim the chances of Synereo's adoption really are. You were only fed the hype "Attention Model" will revolutionize...


Then you aren't going to respect USA securities law. I have noticed this that so many non-USA citizens here think they can give a middle finger to the SEC.


Competition? How is selling ICO vaporware competition? Is the Dash scam competition? Is the Bitshares scam competition? I already showed the statistics that these altcoins have no adoption (not even 1/1000th of Bitcoin's measily adoption).

This is all mining the speculators. That is all it is. And you are fooled.

Lol, yes these dorks (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=550) are going to dominate by requiring bloggers to learn Github.  ::)

Then @ 26mins we have Greg Meredith (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=1557) raving about recruiting an economist and hiring a former Ethereum developer who talks about Oleg's monad blogs. As if this focus on eggheads has anything to do with wide-scale adoption of a social network.

At @30min, Greg admits (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=1813) that the "Lively Gig" team has stated, "Synereo doesn't know what they are doing".

At @38min, Greg points out (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=2352) that there is an insoluble problem in that the value of AMPs will be siphoned off to ETH or BTC units. And he admits Synereo can't scale for 18 months, because current block chain model won't scale and will need to be replaced.

Yes Yes Yes. Decentralized social networking. I dislike Facebook strongly, and its owner whom I believe is anti freedom of speech. Synero has much promise, I look forward to it.  :)

Be careful... those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

https://i.imgur.com/4zhJNVL.jpg

I agree that the problem with Steem it and Synero is the attention model economy. The attention economy should change. I believe that people are going to post and valorize meaningful content if they feel their actions produce the network to connect them with more like-minded people .

I thought for years thoroughly about an mathematic, algorithmic idea of categorizing posts and publishing through colours that represent the "meaning" and the "social value" of the information.

Here is a briefly manifesto:

Content and peoples profile in the network are colorized. You could initially choose for your profile a colour that represents you. Also you can choose an initial tagged colour for your posted content. The colour represent the meaning, the feeling, the information and the intention of your post ("Post" mean content, music, art, "anything". For now on im going to say only the word "post"). People can like your post and put a colour into it if they feel that the content represent the colour. This network intelligence is going to change your initial colour or confirm it.

For example, you can post an ecological proposition and tag it with green. People like it (amp it) and maybe they colorize it to green  if they feel that your content has a green feeling or maybe some of them chose green as a an initial colour avatar/profile and they empatize with you. So through voting your profile avatar turns more greener. Profiles who are in a colour near the green pattern will be more connected to your influence and receive in their top news more material that you post. Advertising can follow the same pattern. For example here in Argentina, were I leave, there is a fair trade brand of mate called "Titrayju" ("mate" its a drink similar to tea) that doesnt explotes the producers and collectors of the herb. If people like the brand they could upvote the advert and colurize it green  if they feel that your brand represent feelings like natural,ecological or whatever they thought that green represent. A green advert means that its going to show more often and promoted in this type of contents helping them to reach their public targets.

So basically the colour of the profiles of peoples and enterprises will change through posting, upvoting, downvoting and rewards with Amps.

All this behaviour could be hold in the network and mathematically represented through algorithms. Your beheaviour on the network its going to change your colour and your influence. In the network there is going to be changes in trending topics, colour population, perception of information, etc.

Its long to explain but the network should interpret also tagged words through the psicology of colours so there its not going to be guetto colours. For example red and green people will be connected through other feelings and contents and everything (I recommend the reading of "Psychology of Colours" by Eva Heller as a bibliografic resource).

https://javagraphics.java.net/resources/colorpicker.png

After some months of running of the network trending and correlation through different colours should appear so people in real life is going to promote Synereo asking to someone: "What colour are you?"

I do not want to extend me in other topics but with this type of network I know that its possible to make a social impact with a lot of benefits for the world.


Well what do you think? I think this is the missed social and spiritual component of all social networks. I think that through colours its easy to understand and especially is easy to "feel" for the users

I will definitely be trying it.  I love the concept of decentralized social media and people being rewarded for their content rather than making someone else rich. 

Does anyone know when in September it will be released and we can actually use it?

I have been following Synereo for a year and this is great to see it become something that can be used rather than speculated.

How much of synereo's price rise is attributable to Steemit's travails at the moment vs actual substantive decentralised tech build-out at Synereo itself?

Thanks to social media I've been updated to what's going on with my family, friends and acquaintances. If I am paid for being a member of that platform then I would definitely join. I've been a member of this forum also because I can earn from here and I can benefit from it. I will shift to Synereo then if the site is already up and then encourage people to join and if they know that they will earn from it then I'm sure they will join also. Getting paid doing what you like is the best.

Synereos alpha has not been published yet, but the potential synereo is showing is great. Some of the current price rise may come from investors switching from steem to synereo, but I think it is mostly due to people showing interest towards the platform. After a usable version of the social network has been released, we will see how many former steemit users will start using synereo instead.

When will Synereo have an official release? They must hurry up before the market for decentralized social media becomes saturated. Sometimes it would be better to launch early than waiting for a stable version and for the right time. There is a saying in the start up world that says if you released a perfect version of your software, it means you have released it too late.

Thanks, that's helpful.
Has anyone looked at the Yours Network project, which is built on the BTC blockchain. How would this compare to Synereo or indeed Steemit?

September 9th is the official release.

@DecentralizeEconomics. Good, I did not realize that it is already close. I am very excited and I hope it will live with all our expectations. Is this release complete with full nodes and all the client side stuff too?

To answer you question. Yes I will change my social media network. All posts in facebook are some BS and it gets weary everyday seeing just the same all over again. If there is profit in this then that is a PLUS for me.

It's an alpha release.  You will be able to start up your own full node to support the network.  They'll have a hangout session this Wednesday, the 31st, and next Wednesday, the 7th, where I assume they'll go over what will and won't be functional.  The AMP blockchain won't be functional during this release, but instead test AMPs will be utilized.  Users who own test AMPs will be able to convert them to real AMPs.

any bounty or something like to node owners? i was willing to make a AMP node but reading the page i didnt saw any good reason(beside support the network  ::)).

Ok. So when will the beta release be? Will it be out by year end?

Why not introduce the signature campaign here rather than going to social media first?

The idea of sharing the revenue with the users is a good idea,if the platform is good ,there is a scope that people will use the platform, the focus must not be on rapidly shifting the user base to the new platform,rather than welcoming a change into their social media activities. 

Yes, node operators earn AMPs based on their node's processing power / storage capacity.


To my knowledge, they haven't announced the beta release date yet.

Our decentralized Co-Op that's using Synereo tech is growing bigger and bigger thanks to the success of Synereo lately

Pm me if you want to get involved in a Synereo based project and you think Synereo LTD lacks the abilities to build a successful social network with the Synereo tech stack.

I think this is because they don't want to release AMP onto the market yet. They want investors to control all the AMPs so they can keep raising the price. $DCO aka Synereo is going to have signature campaigns early on to distribute coins to users instead of investors.

From now OpenLedger supports Synereo - a Tel-Aviv based company which develops a decentralized tech stack, allowing web applications to exist without centralized servers. Most importantly, Synereo is currently building a reputation-based social network.

What does that mean for OpenLedger (https://openledger.info/?r=synereo) though?

Many crypto-currency enthusiasts are constantly looking for the most up-to-date information about new ICOs or what is happening in digital currency, and Synereo can be that hub.

Synereo is building the first fully decentralized social network. The social network is part of the overall larger project which is a decentralized web. The team is been building RChain and the tech stack (https://blog.synereo.com/2016/09/05/meet-rchain-the-first-scalable-blazing-fast-turing-complete-blockchain/) that is the first scalable blockchain platform to meet the demands of the current internet. It is run on AMP has inherent value (https://blog.synereo.com/2016/09/14/amp-a-cryptocurrency-with-inherent-value/) in both the social layer, and running the blockchain protocol.


Sources of AMP Value

Demand for AMPs originates from 3 main sources:

AMPs will be the fuel for Synereo’s Virtual Machine, and as such are provided as a fee every time someone accesses your node to perform a computational operation, store information, or retrieve that information.

AMPs will be the staking currency of Synereo’s Proof-of-Stake consensus protocol, fronted by validators participating in the Blockchain assembly process.

AMPs lay at the foundation of Synereo’s Attention Economy and can be used to Amplify promoted content — to compensate other users for their attention.


Recently Synereo burned 50% (http://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/trading/synereo-burns-premined-cryptocurrency-valued-140m/?utm_source=Bloggers+club&utm_campaign=a0727e0980-Synereo_and_OpenLedger_Welcome_Synergy_a9_19_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_40cf6c0837-a0727e0980-) of its total supply prior to  its second round of crowdfunding to begin September 19th (https://sale.synereo.com/) at 8:00PM PST (September 20th 03:00 GMT. There is a bonus opportunity for the first 24 hours.)






Find out more about Synereo:

Synereo raises $1.2 Million to Fix the Internet (http://www.maxkeiser.com/2016/09/synereo-raises-1-2-million-to-fix-the-internet/)

The (re-)Birth of the World Computer (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-re-birth-of-the-world-computer_us_57df7941e4b04fa361d99ed8)



As OpenLedger grows and scales up with new fintech startups, Synereo could potentially be the social network that becomes the new backbone of crypto-knowledge. Hence, starting today (19th of September) we’ll be uniting our powers towards an overarching goal of two integrated organisations and an abundance of cross promotion activities.

As part of our collaboration with the Synereo team, we have listed AMP on OpenLedger, and it is now possible to both deposit and withdraw automatically without delays. This means that you can trade AMP on the DEX listed as OPEN.AMP. To top it all off, we have listed all other OMNI related assets and are now made available for trading (eg. MaidSafe, Agoras Tokens, Tether USDT, EURT and OMNI itself).


BTS market: https://bitshares.openledger.info/#/market/OPEN.AMP_BTS

BTC market: https://bitshares.openledger.info/#/market/OPEN.AMP_OPEN.BTC

OBITS market: https://bitshares.openledger.info/#/market/OPEN.AMP_OBITS

Available NOW (https://sale.synereo.com/)


Happy trading!



Check out our SteemIt Article about OpenLedger and Synereo:
https://steemit.com/blockchain/@bloggersclub/synereo-and-openledger-welcome-synergy-and-collective-growth

Synereo 2.0 Tech Stack to Compete with Ethereum Protocol?

The potential use of blockchain technology is virtually unlimited. Synereo, a blockchain company based out of Tel Aviv, Israel has recently announced a great progress in the development of a distributed storage protocol.

The company is responsible for creating the first scalable, Turing complete blockchain infrastructure called Rchain. Within weeks of introducing Rchain, Synereo has announced the release of two new components. These two components, Special-K and Rholang are part of the Synereo 2.0 tech stack that enables development of decentralized computation systems over Rchain infrastructure.

Link (http://www.newsbtc.com/2016/09/24/synereo-tech-stack-ethereum/)

Well, well, well, TPTB_need_war has been vindicated!

Its been months and months and months and still no social media. Just lots of promise. This is like a year old thread. If they haven't done it by now they never will. Very disappointing since I liked the idea so much and it made a lot of sense. I guess it will still be a long time till steemit have some decent competition.

It's tragic, because the world is crying out for more incoherent social media quagmires.

My issue with Synereo is that they want to be everything which is not possible, before it was discentalised social platform now Smart contract platform. The current infighting among their developers is another issue to deal with. They need to start walking the talk

Steemit is on a different level and I don't think Synereo can compete with it. At least not at the way on how things are going right. But I am optimistic on Synereo and I believe they can come out of all these problems in flying colors. All investors and supporters just need to stay clam and keep supporting Synereo.

I swear you speculators would invest in dogpoop and argue that you are confident if we kiss it, it will turn into a gleaming Chevy Impala.

Synereo is very ambitious project and the fight within the dev team was a shocker to all investors and people who followed Synereo closely. I think they need to either develop a social media platform or a smart contract platform. One at a time and build from there.

Social media platform would be great and then implement Smart contract on it. Working on both together is kind of weird especially when things move at a snail's pace.

Am I too closed-minded? Am I being too judgemental? Or is this correct discernment? Am I too biased as well incentivized to delude myself into thinking that my work is important and others' work is not?

Was my analysis of the impossibility of the economics of the AMPs attention model upthread (months ago) irrelevant?

I read what other speculators write and it just  boggles my mind that they would be shocked or have ever thought that Synereo could become anything other than a pump and dump.



I am amazed how you guys can't read the personality of a person. Meredith was an attention whore babbling incoherent nonsense in Youtube hangouts. He was an opportunistic parasite on the paydole coattails of the $18 million Ethereum slush fund (which shrunk by 2/3 because it was held in BTC all the way down to $200).

It was entirely clear to me that he was misapplying some hair-brained research and spending all his time pumping up the pre-sale of AMPs to n00bs.

There was no fucking way his concepts for process calculi have relevant applicability to crypto and social networking. It is all hair brained technobabble to fool the n00bs.

If his research was credible, he would be off doing research instead of retired from Microsoft. The research he did for Microsoft was applicable in a narrow way. He is reaching for the stars now because he of a combination of inflated ego and the fact that he is easily taking candy from babies. Scammers are more convincing when they also fooled themselves (he presumably really believes his research is important and should be funded with your BTC)

Flies are drawn to honey. You n00bs are the honey. When will you ever learn. You won't. And that is why there is an endless stream of technobabble ahead...

"Zerotime", "Zeroledger", "Rchain", etc.. Technobabble nonsense.

If they can't explain it in a whitepaper in sufficient detail and specification and in a way that we developers can readily comprehend, then they are technobabble bullshitting.


For example, when you boil all that Meredith process calculi research down to actual effects, that is when you find out it is not a panacea. But they hide that in all the technobabble and moon math, to obfuscate the actual flaws and weaknesses of the technological concept.

Bitshares' DPoS is not technobabble nonsense. Dan's TaPoS is not nonsense. Tendermint's BFT with bonded collateral is not nonsense. These were real innovations (with flaws) as valid experimentation towards improving consensus ordering systems. There are flaws and we can discuss and analyze the implications. The technological concepts are approachable for any one who takes some time to learn. Afaics, the flaws weren't entirely acknowledged by Bitshares though. But at least they are not throwing at us unapproachable technobabble nonsense that our best developers can't analyze.

Dan @ Bitshares has built a community of quality developers. I still think they lack insight though (I could be wrong, they have a growing level of open source participation). What I remember from the Hangouts was Synereo is a mismash of a wide-eyed researcher, a young inexperienced dev in the Netherlands, and some old guy coder with a beard. I listened and I heard mostly unfocused, hyperbole coming from the 3 of them. But you n00bs hear something entirely different. You seem to hear, "something great is happening".

I think there is nothing we can do about this. I think this is why @smooth and others have STFU. I guess I need to do the same. We can't help you n00bs. Sorry we can't.


Edit: the fact that they were pre-selling the AMPS should have been enough of an indication of the likely failure. Stealing candy from babies.

siiiiiiiiggggggggghhhhhhhhhh

Facebook keeps getting better minus those annoying ads and false news I've been seeing from it's users this project is not going nowhere I check the first post and it is 10 months but still nothing come out serious about this new social flatform..