calzone
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 0
|
 |
August 10, 2017, 02:17:59 PM |
|
Synereo is awesome, congrats guys
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
burner2015
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Co founder & CMO SocialX
|
|
August 10, 2017, 02:59:26 PM |
|
everyone selling now is not smart  hodl is the strategy. This is a good idea social is the key to mass adoption. |
|
|
|
|
Diego24
|
|
August 10, 2017, 03:20:59 PM |
|
everyone selling now is not smart hodl is the strategy. This is a good idea social is the key to mass adoption. It is sad to see AMP always gets dumped after they release something. But anyway, congrats to Synereo for their product. I hope they keep progressing in this way in the future. What I was wondering ... if I have a video on youtube but no AMP address or account and someone AMPs me up ... I will not get any AMP ? I am just wondering how this AMPing works for content of people that have no clue AMP and Synereo even exists. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jvper
|
|
August 10, 2017, 04:09:10 PM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here... |
|
|
|
|
MBrandoeye
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 57
Merit: 10
|
|
August 10, 2017, 04:16:08 PM |
|
AMP now is the greatest buy you can deal with.
|
|
|
|
|
ooom
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 165
Merit: 100
Learning is the beginning of wealth.
|
|
August 10, 2017, 04:27:00 PM |
|
What is happening is the future my friends. Synereo has released a working beta product and this is quite a trip to bright future.
A humangues amount of projects has nothing to show and yet they have 100 million market caps.
Crypto is just 9 year old industry. If you think that synereo product will be not used think again.
Crypto community is very small. We are just a couple tousand here and there people. World is huge.
|
Disclaimer: My material is for informational purposes only. It should not be considered legal or financial advice. I do not make any guarantee or other promise as to any results that may be obtained from using my content.
|
|
|
stevebrule_phd
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
|
August 10, 2017, 06:36:22 PM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here... ?? Dude. AMPs can be used by curators with the purpose of earning money, but they are also a way to reward content creators directly. That means no longer will content creators have to rely on bullshit ad revenues, contracts with spotify, etc just to make a fucking living. All you need is a popular channel on youtube, medium, or whatever and you can earn money from what used to be "thumbs up" on a video. No bullshit from corporate entities. Steemit has already shown that this tipping model is a viable way to incentivize content creators. I would certainly tip youtube creators for creating content I like, even if I didn't expect a ROI on my 50 cent tip. Would you not? |
|
|
|
|
|
BossBee
|
|
August 10, 2017, 06:57:47 PM |
|
Wildspark is cool. I want to see it on the brave browser tho (if possible) . I don't use chrome anymore it's uninstalled for good.
Amp would have probably pumped hard this last week if the devs didn't dump on the release of the closed beta. They should have waited to do it today and we all could have made a really nice chunk of change.
|
|
|
|
|
jvper
|
|
August 10, 2017, 07:09:55 PM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here... ?? Dude. AMPs can be used by curators with the purpose of earning money, but they are also a way to reward content creators directly. That means no longer will content creators have to rely on bullshit ad revenues, contracts with spotify, etc just to make a fucking living. All you need is a popular channel on youtube, medium, or whatever and you can earn money from what used to be "thumbs up" on a video. No bullshit from corporate entities. Steemit has already shown that this tipping model is a viable way to incentivize content creators. I would certainly tip youtube creators for creating content I like, even if I didn't expect a ROI on my 50 cent tip. Would you not? I would prefer to invest in my children's education rather than regularly send money to youtubers, but it actually doesn't matter what I would or wouldn't do. This is the wrong question. What really matters is what most people would do. And they wouldn't tip. Talking about Steemit... Do you see STEEM Dollars or even liquid STEEM flowing to good content authors? No! No tips! You only see upvotes. In Steemit, an upvote doesn't mean you are emptying your pockets on that decision. It is damn easy to upvote for free. I am not selling AMP now because I already sold at around 20k sats, but I think it is a good opportunity to sell once again, before the hype vanishes and the true reality arises. |
|
|
|
|
stevebrule_phd
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
|
August 10, 2017, 07:45:48 PM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here... ?? Dude. AMPs can be used by curators with the purpose of earning money, but they are also a way to reward content creators directly. That means no longer will content creators have to rely on bullshit ad revenues, contracts with spotify, etc just to make a fucking living. All you need is a popular channel on youtube, medium, or whatever and you can earn money from what used to be "thumbs up" on a video. No bullshit from corporate entities. Steemit has already shown that this tipping model is a viable way to incentivize content creators. I would certainly tip youtube creators for creating content I like, even if I didn't expect a ROI on my 50 cent tip. Would you not? I would prefer to invest in my children's education rather than regularly send money to youtubers, but it actually doesn't matter what I would or wouldn't do. This is the wrong question. What really matters is what most people would do. And they wouldn't tip. Talking about Steemit... Do you see STEEM Dollars or even liquid STEEM flowing to good content authors? No! No tips! You only see upvotes. In Steemit, an upvote doesn't mean you are emptying your pockets on that decision. It is damn easy to upvote for free. I am not selling AMP now because I already sold at around 20k sats, but I think it is a good opportunity to sell once again, before the hype vanishes and the true reality arises. Your assumption is wrong. Most people are paying spotify 9$/month for content. Everyone knows spotify fucks artists over... so I am betting that people would happily give that same 9$/month (or less!) directly to their favorite creators/curators if the switch is painless (and it will be with just a few more tweaks). And you can certainly still upvote... but now we have an a way to pay content creators easily, and directly. No middle man, no shitty waste of time ads. It's pretty great. I can't understand why you feel the need to FUD this, lmao. You have yet to put forward a valid criticism. Also, you should probably invest more than 50 cents into your kids educations, man. That really isn't much. |
|
|
|
|
|
Elokane (OP)
|
|
August 10, 2017, 08:08:22 PM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here... 20% of the people in the beta made more money than they put in. |
|
|
|
|
Figatko
|
|
August 10, 2017, 09:11:13 PM |
|
It works. My friend amped a pair of videos that I amped and i've got a little reward. Cool, but there are questions that I'll ask later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jvper
|
|
August 10, 2017, 09:50:40 PM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here... ?? Dude. AMPs can be used by curators with the purpose of earning money, but they are also a way to reward content creators directly. That means no longer will content creators have to rely on bullshit ad revenues, contracts with spotify, etc just to make a fucking living. All you need is a popular channel on youtube, medium, or whatever and you can earn money from what used to be "thumbs up" on a video. No bullshit from corporate entities. Steemit has already shown that this tipping model is a viable way to incentivize content creators. I would certainly tip youtube creators for creating content I like, even if I didn't expect a ROI on my 50 cent tip. Would you not? I would prefer to invest in my children's education rather than regularly send money to youtubers, but it actually doesn't matter what I would or wouldn't do. This is the wrong question. What really matters is what most people would do. And they wouldn't tip. Talking about Steemit... Do you see STEEM Dollars or even liquid STEEM flowing to good content authors? No! No tips! You only see upvotes. In Steemit, an upvote doesn't mean you are emptying your pockets on that decision. It is damn easy to upvote for free. I am not selling AMP now because I already sold at around 20k sats, but I think it is a good opportunity to sell once again, before the hype vanishes and the true reality arises. Your assumption is wrong. Most people are paying spotify 9$/month for content. Everyone knows spotify fucks artists over... so I am betting that people would happily give that same 9$/month (or less!) directly to their favorite creators/curators if the switch is painless (and it will be with just a few more tweaks). And you can certainly still upvote... but now we have an a way to pay content creators easily, and directly. No middle man, no shitty waste of time ads. It's pretty great. I can't understand why you feel the need to FUD this, lmao. You have yet to put forward a valid criticism. Also, you should probably invest more than 50 cents into your kids educations, man. That really isn't much. I am not FUDing (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt). I am analyzing it. Every project is intrinsically uncertain. There will always be doubt, and that's where money comes from: a good analysis out of the doubt and uncertainty. Everyone has reasons to believe in something. I believe the design is not sustainable, because people will soon find out they make money (let's say...) around 20% of the time and lose about 80% of the time. So why would you care to spend time curating content if you are losing in the long term? I don't get the driver of value here. I could jump back in and buy twice the number of AMPs I previously had, since the price is currently half, but I don't see any comment showing the potential value here. |
|
|
|
|
|
Diego24
|
|
August 10, 2017, 09:53:00 PM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here...
Don't you lose money if you Amplify yourself and nobody else Amplifies you ? I guess you can't create money out of thin air. When you Amplify money that is tipped will just be redistributed. If you are the only one voting on yourself, you don't make money. Anyway, I guess that's why the product is also beta. If the rewarding scheme doesn't work, they can always change it afterwards. |
|
|
|
|
|
Diego24
|
|
August 10, 2017, 09:57:54 PM |
|
people will soon find out they make money (let's say...) around 20% of the time and lose about 80% of the time. So why would you care to spend time curating content if you are losing in the long term?
Maybe people just like to tip people that give away valuable content for free ? I see youtube channels where people just post their crypto addresses to get tipped and people do send them money. By the way, you address a similar problem as Steem has. But it can work if advertisements are added. If companies buy up Steem or AMP to give them the right to make advertisements on these platforms, then this money can be redistributed amongst content creators and curators. |
|
|
|
|
stevebrule_phd
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
|
August 11, 2017, 12:22:54 AM |
|
OMG... Dor and his team wrote wonderful articles upon the attention economy and media flows on the Internet. AMPs would tokenize the cost of attention. But what we see is some old multilevel strategy to deceive people who think they can make money by AMPlifying and sharing links, hoping that other people will follow those steps. As soon as they realize it doesn't work and they lose money in average, they will only try to make content and AMPlify their own content for more AMPs, but probably there will not be many people AMPlifying that content, only themselves. I may be wrong, but I really don't see a point here... ?? Dude. AMPs can be used by curators with the purpose of earning money, but they are also a way to reward content creators directly. That means no longer will content creators have to rely on bullshit ad revenues, contracts with spotify, etc just to make a fucking living. All you need is a popular channel on youtube, medium, or whatever and you can earn money from what used to be "thumbs up" on a video. No bullshit from corporate entities. Steemit has already shown that this tipping model is a viable way to incentivize content creators. I would certainly tip youtube creators for creating content I like, even if I didn't expect a ROI on my 50 cent tip. Would you not? I would prefer to invest in my children's education rather than regularly send money to youtubers, but it actually doesn't matter what I would or wouldn't do. This is the wrong question. What really matters is what most people would do. And they wouldn't tip. Talking about Steemit... Do you see STEEM Dollars or even liquid STEEM flowing to good content authors? No! No tips! You only see upvotes. In Steemit, an upvote doesn't mean you are emptying your pockets on that decision. It is damn easy to upvote for free. I am not selling AMP now because I already sold at around 20k sats, but I think it is a good opportunity to sell once again, before the hype vanishes and the true reality arises. Your assumption is wrong. Most people are paying spotify 9$/month for content. Everyone knows spotify fucks artists over... so I am betting that people would happily give that same 9$/month (or less!) directly to their favorite creators/curators if the switch is painless (and it will be with just a few more tweaks). And you can certainly still upvote... but now we have an a way to pay content creators easily, and directly. No middle man, no shitty waste of time ads. It's pretty great. I can't understand why you feel the need to FUD this, lmao. You have yet to put forward a valid criticism. Also, you should probably invest more than 50 cents into your kids educations, man. That really isn't much. I am not FUDing (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt). I am analyzing it. Every project is intrinsically uncertain. There will always be doubt, and that's where money comes from: a good analysis out of the doubt and uncertainty. Everyone has reasons to believe in something. I believe the design is not sustainable, because people will soon find out they make money (let's say...) around 20% of the time and lose about 80% of the time. So why would you care to spend time curating content if you are losing in the long term? I don't get the driver of value here. I could jump back in and buy twice the number of AMPs I previously had, since the price is currently half, but I don't see any comment showing the potential value here. "I'm convinced because I'm convinced" Okay congratulations. Go be convinced somewhere else and quit spreading FUD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Park.Bom
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 5
|
|
August 11, 2017, 08:05:13 AM |
|
It's strange situation, Synereo made a product launch, but rising it's competitor - BAT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diego24
|
|
August 11, 2017, 08:38:22 AM |
|
It's strange situation, Synereo made a product launch, but rising it's competitor - BAT
I don't own BAT but I read on some crypto site that there good news came out from them. So maybe only the AMP dump is strange, not the BAT rise. It is a pity what happens to AMP all the time. But I had to sell once again. I will keep an eye on AMP because I am sure it has a lot of potential. But the market doesn't seem to agree yet. I am going to resume coin flipping again because it has turned out to be more rewarding to me than holding altcoins. |
|
|
|
|
|
