I had proposed charging a nominal amount for comment account creation, but I got a hard no. Too bad. It certainly would have thwarted the worst offenders, who were creating dozens of accounts a day.
I had proposed charging a nominal amount for comment account creation, but I got a hard no. Too bad. It certainly would have thwarted the worst offenders, who were creating dozens of accounts a day.
That's an excellent idea, too bad management said no. a friend of mine works on an outlet where only paid subscribers can comment. Not only it reduces spam by 100% but it actually allows for a more thoughtful and meaningful discussion.
Is it an all-time ban? Or just a temporary ban, until their subscription renews? What if they deserve an all-time ban? Will that lead to them cancelling their subscription altogether? I think management was (overly) concerned about tying a person's conduct in the comments to their subscription, for fear of lost revenue.
In the early 2000s I used to run a small travel related website and added commenting. Ads just on comment deep link pages paid the rent on my apartment.
Urbit ID solves this problem, too.
This is not a problem that requires blockchain to solve, and it makes me wonder what other issues are built into the project.
"Bitcoin (₿) is a cryptocurrency invented in 2008"[2]
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbit [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin
Can't really find any info about when they officially "created" this thing, but color me skeptical when someone says they "worked on blockchain" before blockchain was even invented.
https://urbit.org/blog/why-urbit-probably-does-not-need-a-bl...
I'll revise my position to simply being that of course Urbit needs a consensus ledger, and that blockchain technology is a good solution for that.
For a start they redefine a lot of words and concepts to their own meanings, rather than commonly accepted ones, in a way that's reminiscent of cult-y organisations. These then feed into their own obscure programming language. This serves as a barrier to entry and an in-group language.
Secondly, well it was started by Curtis Yarvin, whose (unpalatable) ideas about neo-feudalism are baked in.
But yeah, look up prior HN discussions if you want more info. Urbit is an oddity, and not necessarily a good one.
Besides, what you're proposing is essentially the same as "charging for account creation", but with extra steps.
You're begging the question (i.e. whether or not Urbit ID would succeed). Besides, Urbit ID needn't be forced on users, it could be offered side-by-side other options.
>Besides, what you're proposing is essentially the same as "charging for account creation", but with extra steps.
There are several major differences, the most obvious of which is that an Urbit ID user would not have to pay to create an account. This is because the Urbit ID could be tied to many different accounts across the internets. In other words, a person could pay for one Urbit ID, and then be able to comment on many on-line internet journals using that single Urbit ID.