Wonderful write-up making clear much of what I’ve been trying to figure out myself.
I’m most excited at how a token model can change the incentives of media. Current incentives drive technology companies to distract. A company like Facebook makes more ad revenue as you spend more time on the service. You spend more time on the service if they present histrionic content that makes you outraged. These incentives lead to phenomena such as “fake news.”
Folks like Tristan Harris have a vision for a product designer’s “Code of Ethics,” to design for “Time Well Spent.” This is an important consideration, but just where will be the the economic will to follow such a code? That’s unclear.
Meanwhile, I’ve gotten a ton of value from, say, Tim Ferriss over the past ten years, but he’s gotten maybe $4 from me, in the form of book royalties. Something is broken about that.
There are currently chokepoints in value flow from one person to another, and this shapes media. You can either have a big audience and create abstract content (and be incentivized to use gimmicks to attract that audience), or you can have a smaller audience, and create very specific content with a high price-tag (for best results, build an online course about how to make money building online courses).
There’s a gap in media where abstract and fringe ideas are hard to support (and, one could argue, being rational and balanced is hard to support, too)
(You could also put “Academia” in the “Abstract / Low Volume” quadrant, too. Academia has its own incentives problems, which lead to concept creep for the sake of furthering one’s career.)
So, the idea of shared tokens, such as STEEM, has a chance to change media. Crypto-tokens can promote measured, thoughtful communication of fringe ideas and values, with financial support for those who pursue and promote them. I think that’s exciting.