Matt
@mattlee
One of the weirdest things a lot of creator economy type companies do is put a lot of effort into getting big name creators on their platform. Why would you favor the 0.1% of creators who were able to thrive in the old system in favor of the 99.9% who’s been left behind?
5 replies
3 recasts
28 reactions
Vinay Débrou ⚙️
@vinaydebrou.eth
exactly. creator economy leads to 1. a power law (rich/famous get richer and more famous) 2. hopium-filled slotmachine for the poor to keep playing to win algorithmic lottery (tiktok style) 🤮 cc: @tike @matthew on the other side, p2p tipping with noice or small-group onchain poker like with farpoker or onchain commerce (marketplace selling of merch or services) - those are more realistic ways to make a bit of money for the average user consistently
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
tk
@tike
i think generally *everything* falls into the power law VC, stocks, tokens, habits, relationships et al so the big 0.1% creators will bring in 98% of the viewership / volumes and so on although w noice anybody can earn via a like
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Vinay Débrou ⚙️
@vinaydebrou.eth
Yes in web2 social networks based on follower-following relationships, they promoted power law dominated hubs. but its not a given for social networks to have a power law. social clubs in offline world(like the one i host or parties in hollywood or academic collaborations or startup teams) have more of a small-world structure than scale-free networks like that of Twitter & Instagram. Initial era of Facebook was more small-world like when it was limited to elite college campuses like Harvard.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction