Micropayments, Knowledge Economy & related considerations

Hi All,

I haven’t seen alot of detail about micropayments, other than a few notes about gas costs, in microLibra…

Few quick points;

  1. Traditional work-force / work (pre-internet) didn’t have the opportunity for billions of people to contribute a small amount for something produced (perhaps able to be used by trillions of ‘things’) as to aggregate micropayments; and pay a person a wage.

Therein - there’s not a scarcity of work or things to do; there’s a scarcity of ways to pay people for work. Micropayments is an important and innovative future economic instrument, that may serve to pay people who find things of value to do; and go get them done. Therein - if someone’s wage per hour is $50, they work on something for 2 hours and it’s consumed by 40k people - perhaps its a portion of those users who could pay a minor amount (compared to the cost of electricity, internet, devices, etc.) as to put a big dint in the issue of web-slavery.

  1. Energy calculation of Micropayment floor-price
    Bitcoin currently incurs the consumption of a vast amount of energy for every transaction. transferring 1 satoshi, will reportable lead to 549 Kw/H worth of energy being consumed (source: https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption ).

Does Libra have any ideas / considerations around how it relates the natural world cost, to the transaction cost, perhaps also some ontological approaches that may help with consumer labelling (ie: green energy vs. alternatives) and thereby also; consider how and what the floor price for a micropayment may economically be made able, to be achieved.

  1. Electronic contracting ontologies, Choice of Law, etc.

Is there any information about the use of vocab (ie: Graph related); scope, etc.

  1. Qualification related Transactions (Verifiable Claims)
    It may be the case that some transactions may benefit from being able to identify whether the service / product provider is legit. This in-turn relates also to point (3) noting, it seemed sensible to expressly note the consideration of verifiable claims, being beneficial.

Decentralising Trust Ecosystems using Micropayments.

incorporating the non-exclusive subtopic - micropayments and addressing ‘fake news’.

An idea i just came-up with was to add to platforms such as facebook something that’s similar to the like button, but is actually a ‘trust’ button - whereby, people could socially provide links and interactions discerning trustworthy vs. untrustworthy. This could in-turn be employed using Gamification; such as, putting micropayments towards whether the post is true/false, misleading/accurate, fact or fiction, etc. perhaps those who put the effort into making comments on a post that may otherwise be ‘fake news’ would be cheaper to improve the quality of media relied upon by others to support sense-making about reality; than could otherwise be achieved, by simply relying upon corporations to hire staff and do it all internally.

1 Like

Some other thoughts via https://theconversation.com/four-ways-blockchain-could-make-the-internet-safer-fairer-and-more-creative-118706

Pingback: UseCase Tools (knowledge equity systems?)

pingback: W3C Interop?

Pingback: Ethical Finance Compatible?

pingback: environmental accounting - Energy Use | Environmental Accounting

I’ve written this medium post about some considered implications of libra in association to broader graph technology operated by those such as facebook; and thereby, seeking to set-out a series of considerations relating to far broader, yet instrumental considerations that may ‘make or break’ this libra initiative; and/or, assist in considerations around how to better factor some of the operational / organisational considerations. Therein, this is now posted with a view to being assistive in seeking to ensure libra can best achieve its goals, whilst incorporating considerations about the broader ‘environmental issues’ that i think, are important to consider.

Feedback & discussion, welcomed.