e83b66a8…6c2b -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    I think there are several factors here:
|    
|    For Artists:
|    
|    "People change when the pain of staying the same becomes greater than the pain of changing. "
|    
|    "Network affect" You go where your audience are, not where you'd like them to be.
|    
|    
|    For the audience:
|    
|    Free > Cost
|    Free + adverts > Cost, for most, but not all.
|    
|    Attention is a currency most are used to paying, if you charge money on top of that, then the benefits have to
|    be clear. In the case of YouTube or Spotify, this becomes the removal of adverts.
|    
|    Semi serious, but perhaps artists could do deals with advertisers and write songs about private health insurance
|    or EasyJet and integrate the adverts into the songs 😂
|    reply [1 reply]

e83b66a8…6c2b -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    I'm going to travel on a hypothetical journey which will include exploring the world of altcoins and NFTs. If
|    this offends you look away 😂
|    
|    Graphic artists have NFTs on altchains to enable them to monetise digital art. It doesn't lock it behind a
|    paywall, but it does allow supporters to pay for unique digital copies. I know this went crazy with the whole
|    bored ape thing, but the principle is valid.
|    
|    It would technically be possible to create an audio encoding system that embedded a wallet address which,
|    through a smart contract, would force the transfer of funds in order to execute (play) the contract (music
|    track).
|    
|    Thus, you could place audio tracks behind a decentralised, artist owned, paywall. That contract could be
|    modified by the artist so that they can change the monetary exchange depending on demand, fame etc... So an
|    artist just starting out may wish to allow free play of their tracks, whereas Taylor Swift may up the cost to
|    play a song to $1 (for example).
|    
|    Historically, despite the bad wrap and the potential for abuse, recording labels and managers have been highly
|    incentivised financial guardians of their artists ensuring not only the artist earned money from their work, but
|    the studio and manager earned its share too.
|    
|    Placing that monetary management onto artists in the V4V space may be too much of an ask, encoding it into the
|    music tracks itself may be a way to abstract the artist from the financial management they are now burdened
|    with.
|    reply [1 reply]

ee6ea13a…6e74 -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    Personally I think cryptographically linking art to money cheapens the art. I don’t know how we solve the #v4v
|    dilemma but NFTs ain’t it.
|    reply [1 reply]

9fce3aea…87e6 -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    I think NFTs got a bad name. Finally. Enough people got burned off phrases like “web3,” and “blockchain” through
|    the rug pullers.
|    reply [1 reply]

ee6ea13a…6e74 -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    That won’t wash off easily.
|    reply [1 reply]

Joe Martin -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    shitcoins and NFTs have also screwed things up badly. V4V is a pure model with no catches or expectations. It is
|    the only reason I feel comfortable promoting this idea. To people that don't fully understand what I'm talking
|    about, they think I'm being scammy somehow. It's sad
|    reply [1 reply]

a7c9b733…ca8f -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    Why do they think you are being fraudulent? Do you have any theories?
|    reply [1 reply]

ee6ea13a…6e74 -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    Years of pump-and-dump scams and rugpulls and you ask this question.
|    reply [1 reply]

a7c9b733…ca8f -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    Hold on a second, I'm not talking about NFT, I'm talking about V4V. What does one thing have to do with the
|    other? What would make someone think V4V is a scam and confuse it with NFT? Again, I asked Joe. Why do they
|    think you would be deceiving them?
|    reply [1 reply]

ee6ea13a…6e74 -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    Because in their minds, bitcoin, crypto, web3, NFTs, and scams are all interchangeable. “Value for value” is a
|    meaningless term to them.
|    reply [1 reply]

a7c9b733…ca8f -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    In this case, we have a range of information. An education problem, and a platform problem. It's great to
|    receive in satoshi, but that shouldn't be the rule on Nostr. We already have a gap to be filled. The fan wants
|    to pay and receive the product, right? If this is resolved, from the artist's and the audience's point of view,
|    the medium makes no difference whatsoever. Afterwards, one can even ask or advise that they work with BTC, but
|    it shouldn't be mandatory. This is a barrier. In my opinion, an opportunity.
|    reply [1 reply]

Joe Martin -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    I think btc (lightning) being used under the hood is a must for the openness and interoperability aspect. But I
|    deffo thing default displays can be in fiat. Imagine downloading one of these apps as a listener that has never
|    interacted with bitcoin and seeing a default zap of 1000 sats. They'd be like what the hell, how much is that?!
|    *delete
|    reply [1 reply]

e83b66a8…6c2b -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    A lot of fiat companies denominate in fiat while using Bitcoin on the backend.
|    
|    Strike being one of them, although they do show BTC as well, but one of their core markets is allowing foreign
|    workers to send their pay checks back home without the high cost of wire transfer services.
|    reply [1 reply]

Joe Martin -- 21d [parent] [-]
|    It's more for calculation purposes for newbies. They want to know if they're sending and receiving a dollar, not
|    1000 sats.
|    If the artists choose to keep the sats or cash out is up to them. We're trying to solve the payment issue for
|    artists. Keep it as simple as possible
|    
|    We're looking at this from a payments perspective of lightning rather than btc as better savings (that's a
|    separate conversation)
|    reply [1 reply]