@Adam,
I'm glad you like the idea. Let me expand it a little bit then - I've been thinking about this A LOT lately (and falling behind on my more 'down to earth' projects but that's fine, singularity is now and I wanna be a part of it) and here are my 'bigger picture' thoughts on the topic.
It will be a longer piece so I split it into two posts - 1. content protocol layer and 2. the content application layer.
Part 1. The Protocol Layer - the 'Content Coin'
The objective, 'bitcoin-like' , trustless model of issuing & distributing tokens - let's call it a 'Content Coin'. No centralised subjectivity here, Proofs Of Value,
At its core it would be a 'colored coin' where color is the URL.
So each address in this 'colored content-coin' has 'value' and 'URL' - like Namecoin but with an extra variable representing value. Potentially also an identity variable like keybase.io.
Each piece of content would be then represented by 'URL' , 'Author's Identity' (but not necessarily real name) and 'Token Value'
The distribution method is a Proof-of-Tip / Timestamp model or 'Tip-As-Stake' model:
Tipping buys you stake in a Content Coin address but DIVIDED by timestamp.
Stake = Tip Amount / Timestamp * Timestamp Weight
As time passes the same tip buys you a smaller stake in a Content Address.
Why divide by a weighted timestamp?
It's sole purpose is to reward early curators to discover, curate and promote content to others who might find it relevant AND are most likely to tip.
By adjusting the timestamp weight you could adjust the model to favour different types of content curation. i.e more weight on timestamp would be suitable for news sites where content lifecycle is short (yesterday's news value is 0), less weight on timestamp would be more suitable for long-form content with long content lifecycle (Shakespeare's literature is still valuable today).
New money that is issued goes to only addresses which increased their Total Value Tipped in the last block (proportionally to their Total Value Tipped) . But is distribution on the address level is in direct proportion to the stake each tipper holds.
This encourages early tipping of content with long term potential.
The model creates a new incentive scheme for content curators who have interest in showcasing this content to users who will potentially find valuable and tip.
To achieve the ideal 'trustlessness' and make it work , we would have to really rework the fabric of the internet because the ['URL','Value', 'Identity'] combination should happen on the lowest possible level of the network - I'm imagining something like MaidSafe + NameCoin + Content Coins.
For our early tests it could very well happen on the LTBcoin CMS level but then trust is centralised in this CMS system.
ContentCoin essentially is a Web 3.0 'value web' layer on top of Web 1.0 (documents and links) and Web 2.0 (user profiles and likes, shares, followers etc).
In reality, ContentCoin wouldn't be just one 'objective' layer, as each URL could be ranked multiple times by different ContentCoin communities operating on different ledgers/blockchains. The same blogpost /URL could be ranked very high in ContentCoin_News community but low in the ContentCoin_Literature community.
That's fine because content's value is subjective and ContentCoin would do exactly that - add a layer of 'measured subjectivity' to the objective (but as we know today - insufficient) measures of value on the web such as links, shares, followers.
Users would naturally only contribute to ContentCoin ledgers where they get maximum return on their time invested. That means ledgers where they can create or predict the future subjective value better and/or faster than others. In the ideal world, this model would self-organise creators/curators in multiple communities in the most efficient fashion.
To be continued in the next post...
