Jump to content

Stefan Thomas - Web Monetization: An Alternative to Ads - View Source 2019


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Wandering_Dog said:

If I owned xrp I would be here peddling hopium just like you, King. 

No "hopium" here. I'm just providing my opinion just as you are. We're at opposite ends of the spectrum, but that's a good thing. I oftentimes seek out those offering opposing ideologies as a way of comparing/contrasting my views to theirs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, King34Maine said:

I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. Just providing my opinnion(s). That statement was more of me underscoring how relatively new this space is and to be getting all bent out of shape over dips and valleys in price at this juncture when use cases are starting to be implemented and/or revealed doesn't make sense. You can be concerned about the price all you want. That's your prerogative. At the end of the day you purchased XRP of YOUR own choice and free will. Ripple did not force you to buy XRP from any exchange. Again, as I stated before in my previous response, Ripple has always viewed XRP as a catalyst to help activate and develop the ecosystem. There are many unknowns and substantial risks involved with investing in crypto.  Nobody likes to see the value of their holdings drop no matter how small the investment. However, I oftentimes find that those who constantly go back-and-forth about the price dropping are usually individuals who invested beyond their means and/or those who didn't understand what they were getting into and blindly FOMO'ed into this space without doing the proper due-diligence. I am not concerned about the price of XRP either way. I know that the amount of money I have invested in crypto overall is but a small fraction of my financial portfolio. Either my bet on Ripple and XRP will prove to be a wise decision or not. Either way, I won't loose any sleep. If you can't say the same, then my friend, you have too much skin in the game. 

As a reminder, please try to keep your posts on topic.  This thread is related to Stefan giving a presentation on Web Monetization: An Alternative to Ads.  The amount of my personal sleep or money invested has little relevancy to this thread's topic.

Moving this conversation back to the topic of the original post. Let us know if you need any additional evidence in areas like the following, which more details can be provided:

  1. Correlations with Coil and increasing selling pressures of XRP.
  2. The impacts on increased selling pressure and lower XRP trading values in the XRP community.
  3. The consequences of continuous increased selling pressure and loss of trading value for the XRP community.
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, wogojump said:

As a reminder, please try to keep your posts on topic.  This thread is related to Stefan giving a presentation on Web Monetization: An Alternative to Ads.  The amount of my personal sleep or money invested has little relevancy to this thread's topic.

Moving this conversation back to the topic of the original post. Let us know if you need any additional evidence in areas like the following, which more details can be provided:

  1. Correlations with Coil and increasing selling pressures of XRP.
  2. The impacts on increased selling pressure and lower XRP trading values in the XRP community.
  3. The consequences of continuous increased selling pressure and loss of trading value for the XRP community.

None of the three things you listed has anything to do with the topic of discussion which is, as you correctly stated, "a presentation on Web Monetization: An Alternative to Ads." I've viewed the YouTube video and there was nothing in it about the:

  1. Correlations with Coil and increasing selling pressures of XRP.
  2. The impacts on increased selling pressure and lower XRP trading values in the XRP community.
  3. The consequences of continuous increased selling pressure and loss of trading value for the XRP community.

You and @Javim777 took the conversation down a different path. I was simply following the leaders in this instance providing my views and opinions as the conversation evolved. So, if we are truly to get back on topic we should be discussing, as the title of the post's suggests, "Web Monetization: An Alternative to Ads."  

 

Edited by King34Maine
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2019 at 8:16 PM, King34Maine said:

Ripple gave them 1 billion XRP to help them provide the monetary support for both Coil, build the platform, and incentivize the growth and development of a community of content creators to test and build on top of the platform. How did you think "they" (i.e. Coil) were going to obtain funding for their audacious and, I'll admit, risky endeavor? Nothing like this has ever been attempted, at least not at this level. I completely agree with you that this is a very risky business proposition Stefan has embarked upon via Coil. Changing the status quo is never easy, which is why they've enlisted some of the best partners in promoting open-sourced tech/platforms for content creators. 

A couple flaws with your post:

1. It would be beneficial for XRP community for Coil to get funding, via the typical investment funding processes: https://www.startups.com/library/expert-advice/5-types-startup-funding.  Ripple using XRP sales (primary funded from retails investors at this time) to make abnormally high and risky investments for initiatives like Coil, is not beneficial to Ripple or the XRP community. Including Ripple having personal relationships with Coil employees, while providing little evidence for Coil being a success.

The reality is, if Ripple makes too many risky decisions that do not become successful, they jeopardize their entire business going forward.  Including public backlash and potential lawsuits. Competent leadership and board of directors, do not risk their entire business to take on abnormally high and risky investments.

2. Initiatives like this have been attempted and been successful on this level in the past via other funding processes. Although, there hasn't been a specific initiative this risky and expensive to monetize the web as an alternative to ads.

For example, Google (competitor of Coil's mission) has already received funding and been successful in this industry: https://www.wordstream.com/adwords-vs-adsense. So saying "Nothing like this has ever been attempted, at least not at this level", is false.  Google is already dominating the market, including them pushing their AdSense product.  Their AdSense product is literally marketed as "Earn money with website monetization".

Edited by wogojump
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wogojump said:

The reality is, if Ripple makes too many risky decisions that do not become successful, they jeopardize their entire business going forward. 

That’s just not even remotely true.  
 

EDIT:   I just realised the small part I quoted, if taken out of context could misleading.  The investment choices I and the poster referred to are these Xpring based initiatives only.  My comment is not about wider Ripple decisions.

 

Edited by Guest
Add clarification
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wogojump said:

1. It would be beneficial for XRP community for Coil to get funding, via the typical investment funding processes: https://www.startups.com/library/expert-advice/5-types-startup-funding.  Ripple using XRP sales (primary funded from retails investors at this time) to make abnormally high and risky investments for initiatives like Coil, is not beneficial to Ripple or the XRP community. Including Ripple having personal relationships with Coil employees, while providing little evidence for Coil being a success.

The reality is, if Ripple makes too many risky decisions that do not become successful, they jeopardize their entire business going forward.  Including public backlash and potential lawsuits. Competent leadership and board of directors, do not risk their entire business to take on abnormally high and risky investments.

Response: First, there is no rule that says a start-up must obtain funding via the traditional VC route. Secondly, Ripple's business model isn't predicated on that of Coil's. Ripple's business model or raison d'etre is cross-border payments for banks, FIs, and corporates not web-monetization. Yes, if Coil ends up ending in failure there will be a lot of hand ringing, primarily from the constant chorus of anti-Ripple/XRP-lites who are always just looking for the chance to pounce. With that being said, taking risks is important for innovation!! No company or corporation has ever grown beyond their limitations without taking risks in doing so. Blockchain/DLT/digital assets are creating the foundation for the advent of new industries. Taking risk in this nascent market is 95% of what is going on to see what works and what doesn't work. We can argue back-n-forth about how much risk should be taken all day long, but fact remains that the C-Suite/BOD at Ripple is doing what they feel is within the company'e risk-tolerance. I understand the risks involved with respects to the challenges Coil faces in attempts to get their web-monetization platform up and running with a significant user-base, but they've only been operational for 6 months. I think it hardly the time to be questioning the validity of the thesis behind Coil just yet. Going back to what I said in my initial response this is why they (Coil) are collaborating with strong partners (Mozilla, Creative Commons, and Loup Design and Innovation) to help them get things going. Ethan Beard, Xpring's SVP, said that (2nd paragraph):

Quote

"Today, we are announcing that Xpring has partnered with Coil on a 1 billion XRP grant to bring consumers and creators alike onto Coil’s platform. The funds from the grant will be deployed over time to increase the adoption of XRP and ILP through Coil’s platform, providing utility and liquidity to the ecosystem of creators, developers, companies and nonprofits using XRP through the open Web Monetization standard."

Again, I've said this many times before, we are all XRP "holders" by CHOICE. Unless you own token(s) via an accredited IPO/ICO/STO you in no way, shape, form, or fashion have any say with respects to how any company/entity distributes, sells, or utilizes their holding of a particular token/digital asset/crypto. Brad G (Ripple CEO) said, and i'm quoting:

"XRP sales are about helping expand XRP's utility - building RippleNet & supporting other biz building w/XRP ie Dharma & Forte."

If you really want to get technical the use case for XRP doesn't even involve retail holders who are just simply buying/holding the asset in hopes to turn a profit as/if the price appreciates. At the end of the day this is pure unadulterated speculation on our part. I purposefully say retail "holders of XRP" because that's what retail ownership truly entails, just merely holding XRP or any other non-ICO/STO token/asset. We like to think of ourselves as "investors" just because we own XRP, but that doesn't make us an investor. No, it makes us nothing more than glorified followers and/or enthusiasts of Ripple and XRP period!!! Unless you own equity in Ripple you ultimately have no say with respect to what Ripple does or doesn't do with their XRP holdings or the business decisions the company decides implement. So, say it with me, "I am a holder not an Investor!!!" Stop blaming a company that didn't promise you riches in the first place for not making you any money. This is the risk you take purchasing/holding any digital asset or token not just XRP. 

2 hours ago, wogojump said:

2. Initiatives like this have been attempted and been successful on this level in the past via other funding processes. Although, there hasn't been a specific initiative this risky and expensive to monetize the web as an alternative to ads.

For example, Google (competitor of Coil's mission) has already received funding and been successful in this industry: https://www.wordstream.com/adwords-vs-adsense. So saying "Nothing like this has ever been attempted, at least not at this level", is false.  Google is already dominating the market, including them pushing their AdSense product.  Their AdSense product is literally marketed as "Earn money with website monetization".

Response: Bingo, you hit the nail on the head with your statement "Google is already dominating the market!!!" The business model for the web is completely and utterly broken with ads and subscription models that work best within the constructs of scaled models that has led to the concentration of power and influence in the hands of a few  tech giants (i.e. FANG, Alibaba, Tencent, et al). Coil's web monetization platform is a new way for content creators to make money. It operates and utilizes open standards that are not subjugated to one particular tech giant. In combination with their Grant for the Web program, Coil intends to help smaller players (i.e. small publishers, indie musicians, indie game developers, etc.) compete with "Big Data" who hold the power to decide how content is shared. Coil offers an alternative monetization formula for these content creators to get paid for their work without relying on intrusive advertising schemes (i.e. Adword or Adsense), paywalls, as well as the known abuse of personal data that has run a muck of the Internet of late. In many respects, Coil is doing for your average content creator what Ripple has done for small-medium sized banks and FIs by offering them an alternative to SWIFT and your large correspondent banks (i.e. JP-Morgan, Citi, HSBC, et al). No one gave them a sliver of hope in the beginning. Even the small-medium sized banks who they were going to be most beneficial to were very cautious of engaging with them at the onset. However, the folks at Ripple kept their heads down, remained focused, kept building out the platform, made strategic partnerships and slowly banks/FIs, especially your small-medium sized entities, quickly saw the benefits of the tech stack they offered. Now look at Ripple. It is one of the most successful blockchain/DLT companies that has emerge out of this new industry with over +300 customers and still growing!!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Wandering_Dog said:

If I owned xrp I would be here peddling hopium just like you, King. 

I cant imagine myself logging into the chatforums of one of the 2000 coins I dont own to give people negative investment advice. What motivates you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@King34Maine - I hear ya King, I keep trying to remind people, we're hoarders - we are NOT helping Ripple Labs and other stakeholder's current goals - that of building up liquidity into the order books of the world's exchanges.

The LAST thing Ripple wants to do, is encourage even more speculative hoarding behavior.

Being patient is hard for some :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, King34Maine said:

If you really want to get technical the use case for XRP doesn't even involve retail holders who are just simply buying/holding the asset in hopes to turn a profit as/if the price appreciates. At the end of the day this is pure unadulterated speculation on our part. I purposefully say retail "holders of XRP" because that's what retail ownership truly entails, just merely holding XRP or any other non-ICO/STO token/asset. We like to think of ourselves as "investors" just because we own XRP, but that doesn't make us an investor. No, it makes us nothing more than glorified followers and/or enthusiasts of Ripple and XRP period!!! Unless you own equity in Ripple you ultimately have no say with respect to what Ripple does or doesn't do with their XRP holdings or the business decisions the company decides implement. So, say it with me, "I am a holder not an Investor!!!" Stop blaming a company that didn't promise you riches in the first place for not making you any money. This is the risk you take purchasing/holding any digital asset or token not just XRP. 

 

 

You are incorrect again. This is a false statement I commonly see posted on forums, in regards to XRP holders are not investors. See the definition of a investor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor.

By definition if a person purchases XRP with the expectation of a future financial return or to gain an advantage, they are an investor.  The definition of a investor is not for you to decide, if a person fits in this definition of an investor, that makes them an investor.  There are different types of investors. A common misconception I see is people mistaking the definition of investor vs. shareholder. It is a true statement to say XRP holders are not shareholders of Ripple.

FYI King34Maine, there is no need to reply back.  Your posts are often off topic with false information and made up definitions. I will be ignoring your messages going forward.

Edited by wogojump
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.