Devcoin

[Balthozar]

And I think people will flood in, but  don't think too many people are just going to "Cash out and leave" because they can come back every month and make more.

Not with their entire lifetime ouvre of previously written work they can't, if they already posted the whole shebang during their first round. They'd sign up, dump their entire lifetime's accumulated writings (maybe from back in their college days when they actually did write stuff), dump the resulting coins for cash or bitcoins and not be back (because writing isn't even something they do, it is something the youth they once were once did...)

-MarkM-

And this is exactly more like what I was trying to get across.

[1713904116]

1713904116

[1713904116]

1713904116

[1713904116]

1713904116

[1713904116]

1713904116

[1713904116]

1713904116

[FinShaggy]

And I think people will flood in, but  don't think too many people are just going to "Cash out and leave" because they can come back every month and make more.

Not with their entire lifetime ouvre of previously written work they can't, if they already posted the whole shebang during their first round. They'd sign up, dump their entire lifetime's accumulated writings (maybe from back in their college days when they actually did write stuff), dump the resulting coins for cash or bitcoins and not be back (because writing isn't even something they do, it is something the youth they once were once did...)

-MarkM-

Again,
I know it is possible. I just don't think it will happen enough to matter, maybe 1 guy out of every 100.
This is a generation of Bloggers and Online Critics. This is what people are WAITING for.

[Balthozar]

And I think people will flood in, but  don't think too many people are just going to "Cash out and leave" because they can come back every month and make more.

Not with their entire lifetime ouvre of previously written work they can't, if they already posted the whole shebang during their first round. They'd sign up, dump their entire lifetime's accumulated writings (maybe from back in their college days when they actually did write stuff), dump the resulting coins for cash or bitcoins and not be back (because writing isn't even something they do, it is something the youth they once were once did...)

-MarkM-

Again,
I know it is possible. I just don't think it will happen enough to matter, maybe 1 guy out of every 100.
This is a generation of Bloggers and Online Critics. This is what people are WAITING for.

But it only takes that one guy to hurt the rest of the community for a long time to come.

[markm]

He's right though that vast spews of weird and or nonweird and or any other adjective material is just what the blogger generation seems to want. A large volume of words would be good if it were in the eyes of some readership or other worth visiting the pages to read.

I do worry though whether 1000 words is really worth about 10 or 40 hours of "real work on real problems".

Maybe the lack of income from other sources has led to the estimations of how lucrative a wiki could become to have gotten out of synch with the nowadays lucrativeness of other projects? If we wwere running a cryptocoin exchange as well as the wki, which would make more money, I wonder? Maybe coding is no longer as non-lucrative as once it might have been? Or could be made so, if we could figure a way to get a cut for the project of the fruits of the labour/code?

-MarkM-

[FinShaggy]

But it only takes that one guy to hurt the rest of the community for a long time to come.

I don't see how it hurts the community. He writes, which helps Devtome get traffic. And he sells his DVC for cheap, which allows you to pick up some cheap DVC.

If you look at the big picture, that guy is the only one losing anything, for brief personal gain.

[FinShaggy]

He's right though that vast spews of weird and or nonweird and or any other adjective material is just what the blogger generation seems to want. A large volume of words would be good if it were in the eyes of some readership or other worth visiting the pages to read.

-MarkM-

It's not just a "large volume of words"...
Yes, if someone comes and posts spam, it's just words.

But if they post a paper they wrote in college, they are really just helping Search Engine Optimization, as well as giving other members something to read and possibly base their next article on.

[WildElf]

Devtome writers--
I sent an email to unthinkingbit this morning explaining that yes there were some articles that were posted that we not mine and they have since been removed.  However, I stand by my original submissions namely:

DODMERB_Cloud_Computing
Identity and Access Management
Navy Cloud Computing
Zachman Framework Implementation
Software Assurance

There were written for coursework taken in a graduate program that I recently completed.  I do not condone plagarism and wish to continue contributing to Devtome should you allow me.  I do apologize that I did not safeguard my account as diligently as I should have and take full responsibility for actions taken in my absence.  I fully realize that in order to produce a quality work, there must be a quality reputation.

Please feel free to contact me directly via personal message should you have any questions.

[markm]

He's right though that vast spews of weird and or nonweird and or any other adjective material is just what the blogger generation seems to want. A large volume of words would be good if it were in the eyes of some readership or other worth visiting the pages to read.

-MarkM-

It's not just a "large volume of words"...
Yes, if someone comes and posts spam, it's just words.

But if they post a paper they wrote in college, they are really just helping Search Engine Optimization, as well as giving other members something to read and possibly base their next article on.

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

[Balthozar]

Devtome writers--
I sent an email to unthinkingbit this morning explaining that yes there were some articles that were posted that we not mine and they have since been removed.  However, I stand by my original submissions namely:

DODMERB_Cloud_Computing
Identity and Access Management
Navy Cloud Computing
Zachman Framework Implementation
Software Assurance

There were written for coursework taken in a graduate program that I recently completed.  I do not condone plagarism and wish to continue contributing to Devtome should you allow me.  I do apologize that I did not safeguard my account as diligently as I should have and take full responsibility for actions taken in my absence.  I fully realize that in order to produce a quality work, there must be a quality reputation.

Please feel free to contact me directly via personal message should you have any questions.

I had the same issue regarding a legal article I posted. I removed it, but plan on writing in my own words the laws which it described.

[markm]

Maybe what we could also consider, if there are some folk putting out huge bodies of work, could be to have a "writer's round" periodically that everyone who is not a (prolific) writer can expect in advance to get hardly any coins from because that round all the major writers get to dump huge amounts of writing on the wiki, so almost all the coins that round go to writers...

Personally I have not really tried hard yet to dig up all my old writings as my strategy was generally to make at least some effort to try to keep up with Unthinkingbit but without ending up driving him to pour out even more writing as an attempt to prevent me from dipping too deep into his accustomed stipend.

I figured if I end up driving him to ever greater volumes of output, that would just make me have to work harder to catch up, so I tried to mostly just not fall too far behind.

Also some of my stories and novels I am still not decided the best way/venue/copyright to use for them so not sure yet which I want to put into the free open source content domain.

-MarkM-

[FinShaggy]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

[psybits]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No he means it's a good thing I am excited to start putting sci fi up next round 

[markm]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No, I meant a huge volume of material, suited to so many tastes that likely some would inevitably be distasteful to someone somewhere, would likely be what the modern internet readers would like, as no matter how weird their taste in reading material we'd have plenty of it for them.

-MarkM-

P.S. To which of my articles from the 90's are you referring Sir? Hahahahah j/k

[FinShaggy]

Maybe what we could also consider, if there are some folk putting out huge bodies of work, could be to have a "writer's round" periodically that everyone who is not a (prolific) writer can expect in advance to get hardly any coins from because that round all the major writers get to dump huge amounts of writing on the wiki, so almost all the coins that round go to writers...

Personally I have not really tried hard yet to dig up all my old writings as my strategy was generally to make at least some effort to try to keep up with Unthinkingbit but without ending up driving him to pour out even more writing as an attempt to prevent me from dipping too deep into his accustomed stipend.

I figured if I end up driving him to ever greater volumes of output, that would just make me have to work harder to catch up, so I tried to mostly just not fall too far behind.

Also some of my stories and novels I am still not decided the best way/venue/copyright to use for them so not sure yet which I want to put into the free open source content domain.

-MarkM-

I like the idea of a "writers round" but I would like to see this kind of thing implemented by making sister sites...
Like, make a site JUST for writing completely original works, like books, novels poems etc.
Then have another site that pays people to post pictures
Then another that pays you per minute of video
And another that lets you sell your stuff like ebay
etc etc

[FinShaggy]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No he means it's a good thing I am excited to start putting sci fi up next round 

OHHHH,
Agreed. It is a good thing.

[Balthozar]

I just thought of a flaw that could be executed to get paid multiple times for the same piece of work.

I'll use some of my work as an example:

My article titled Pavlov, I lets say the script runs, pays me for it, then I change it to Pavlov, Ivan. It would recognize that as a new page the next time the script is run. Can anyone think of how to prevent this? And if it can't be prevented, then I would propose that anyone caught doing this shall be banned from devtome forever.

[FinShaggy]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No, I meant a huge volume of material, suited to so many tastes that likely some would inevitably be distasteful to someone somewhere, would likely be what the modern internet readers would like, as no matter how weird their taste in reading material we'd have plenty of it for them.

-MarkM-

Agreed.

The more types of things people post, the more unique users/views will start showing up.

[markm]

I just thought of a flaw that could be executed to get paid multiple times for the same piece of work.

I'll use some of my work as an example:

My article titled Pavlov, I lets say the script runs, pays me for it, then I change it to Pavlov, Ivan. It would recognize that as a new page the next time the script is run. Can anyone think of how to prevent this? And if it can't be prevented, then I would propose that anyone caught doing this shall be banned from devtome forever.

Implementation flaw if it happens.

Consider, we maintain a total number of words so far per writer.

You move your article,

Now the old aritcle is zero words and the new one all the words from old one.

Your new total words is still the same as your old total words...

This assumes tracking how many words each author had last round, and counting up their entire ouvre each round.

In short, we don't just go counting purportedly new stuff, we add up from scratch their entire body of contributions.

I'd be surprised is that is not basically how Unthinkingbit did it. Read the python scripts to check his work but he never struck me as the kind of scripter who'd make such a big loophole when there is such a simple, obvious, albeit brute force, way to do it.

(He might even have found a more elegant way aleviating the use of brute force, now I am curious exactly how he did do it, I never actually went and looked at the scripts to check.)

-MarkM-

[Balthozar]

I just thought of a flaw that could be executed to get paid multiple times for the same piece of work.

I'll use some of my work as an example:

My article titled Pavlov, I lets say the script runs, pays me for it, then I change it to Pavlov, Ivan. It would recognize that as a new page the next time the script is run. Can anyone think of how to prevent this? And if it can't be prevented, then I would propose that anyone caught doing this shall be banned from devtome forever.

Implementation flaw if it happens.

Consider, we maintain a total number of words so far per writer.

You move your article,

Now the old aritcle is zero words and the new one all the words from old one.

Your new total words is still the same as your old total words...

This assumes tracking how many words each author had last around, and counting up their entire ouvre each time around.

In short, we don't just go counting purportedly new stuff, we add up from scratch their entire body of contributions.

-MarkM-

Okay, this is true, because as I recall, you get paid for words you add to articles after rounds' end. Just kind of popped in to my head, I didn't really consider these facts before posting my worries.

[markm]

Still its possible he uses the wiki's "changes" info to figure it, that counts how many words people add to and subtract from articles. So its not impossible you were on to something. It just seems quite likely Unthinkingbit also thought of it, thus that he'd have looked for a way to prevent it, which would if no other way is possible at least lead to sheer brute force.

(He backs up the whole wiki by scraping the pages with curl, so he is known to use brute force already, for that.)

-MarkM-