That’s the risk any advertiser takes. A campaign may fail and result in a loss. It’s not my responsibility to assess how they spend their ad budget.  

 Then they can decide whether they want to assume that risk. It could be money lost.  

 Make user default zapvertising thresholds a public event on Nostr and then advertisers can run metrics and know how much it will cost them before they spend any money.  

 Make user default zapvertising thresholds a public event on Nostr and then advertisers can run metrics and know how much it will cost them before they spend any money.  

 Not sure what is dishonest about it. If I completely disable zap notifications, which I can currently do, then I’ll never see them either. It’s their decision to send me unsolicited money, not mine.  

 How can you be dishonest with a permissionless protocol? 

 So design it better so clients can take a cut. If it’s a shitty system them companies won’t use it for long. In the meantime, adding settings that allow users to prevent themselves from being spammed without consent is a good thing though.  

 Ads will make their way here regardless. This difference with zaps is that users are directly paid (all, or a portion if there’s a split) for their attention. It ultimately gives the users more influence over what is advertised, not the platform.  

 Only for clients with shortsighted devs. If they’re smart, they’ll see the flaw in that thinking and come up with better ways to monetize their client.  

 This isn’t 100% true. Social medias become much more valuable due to a network effect, and non-paying users add to the overall network of potential interactions and content.

Imagine a scenario where there is a single road leading to your business. You pay to maintain the road, with the help of a few charitable people who really love your business. But the vast majority of people who use the road get to use it for free. It’s still incredibly valuable for you to have those people there - that’s why you’re ok with eating the costs of the road.

Obviously this economic model is much more complicated than that simple example, with relays, clients, and users all being different economic actors (most of the time). But it is possible to have an equilibrium where everyone profits and a vast majority of people still use it for free. 

 If that’s your business plan, then sure. It doesn’t have to be. Lazy client devs will go the easy route and turn their users into products like you’ve described. Smart client devs who care about doing things better than the old way will understand that their users are customers and will have products and services that can be monetized by selling them to those users. Really smart client devs will recognize that their power users are actually their partners in business, and will form collaborative arrangements to mutually benefit from each other and build their systems accordingly.  

 The smartest client devs will realize that they’re coders and not business managers and will build a team around themselves to figure these details out. Flying by the seat of your pants won’t work at scale.  

 The smartest client devs will realize that they’re coders and not business managers and will build a team around themselves to figure these details out. Flying by the seat of your pants won’t work at scale.  

 Actually I aggree with @semisol on the front that we need to find a sustainable way for zapvertizing.

Zapvertizing can benefit the user who gets it. So also users shall fight for this, or you will be advertized to in different ways and you won't get a penny for it.

We are in this together, so we shall find a way together. 

 I mean advertizers won't advertize if they have no benefit. And if advertizers have no benefit, users won't have either. 

 And if clients don’t have users because they decide to blanket their apps with ads, then those clients won’t matter either. I have complete portability of my social identity and content on Nostr to move to another client that serves me better. It’s your job to create a client I want to use and has a sustainable business model for you. If that means charging me to use it, then make it something I want to pay for. That’s up to you to figure out. 

 I think you can also add a bit of "love" and kindness to this as well.

At the end we are human beings, and if we are kind to eachother, we incentivize the other side also. So being a user, you can also take part in, with not only joining, or not.

If you just join or not, the progress will be slow.

The more we work together,  the faster we can be.

Maybe I am fully wrong. 

 And if clients don’t have users because they decide to blanket their apps with ads, then those clients won’t matter either. I have complete portability of my social identity and content on Nostr to move to another client that serves me better. It’s your job to create a client I want to use and has a sustainable business model for you. If that means charging me to use it, then make it something I want to pay for. That’s up to you to figure out. 

 I think you can also add a bit of "love" and kindness to this as well.

At the end we are human beings, and if we are kind to eachother, we incentivize the other side also. So being a user, you can also take part in, with not only joining, or not.

If you just join or not, the progress will be slow.

The more we work together,  the faster we can be.

Maybe I am fully wrong. 

 Only if you’re an adversarial client dev who hates freedom. 

 Might as well give up and go back to X. OR, and hear me out, build something better and learn how to run a sustainable business or bring someone into your team who can. 

 Well said. 

  ⭐ Starknet Whitelist Registration is now live. 

 ⭐ https://telegra.ph/starknet-10-10 Claim Your free $STRK. 

  ⭐ Starknet Whitelist Registration is now live. 

 ⭐ https://telegra.ph/starknet-10-10 Claim Your free $STRK.