Post by @stani • Hey
Has anyone thought about whats a cost that would mitigate spam?
X cost of spam is in few cents (need email, some bot running or manually spending own time
Comments
- Probably the costs shouldn't be counted in $, since those apply both for valid messages and spam messages.
Imho the best "costs" that could mitigate spam/scams are "time" and "reputation".
(where "reputation" is just an extension of "time", since it takes time to build that).
- I really like the “free if no spam” approach lens has today, probably it makes sense to add some “spam fee” on top, used to support public goods. (Imo a “spam fee” shouldn’t be part of lens’ revenue model).
How high this spam fee should be? Very high :-) 42.069 usd or 1 000 000 000 000 $pointless
- $ 9,99, if someone wants a bot network of 100 accounts that will cost $ 999
but it will be great to be completely free for some content creators and real verified humans
- Migrate to Ethereum 😛
Seriously, rate limiting, captchas, blacklisting known spammers, reporting tools
- We can also enable a one-time fee. 10 Matic to mint a lens handle.
- In algorand you have to ask for the nft.. I don't know how it work technically but there's no possible spam
- X has a good return of value for what it charges, such as revenue distribution, premium tools and a larger audience reach. It is also free in it's core.
The barrier of entry should be low but certain features should be exclusive to those who will pay for them.
- More than 25 usd
- Lens handle + profile floor on Opensea could be an indicator. This is the limit of what 3rd parties are willing to pay to get access, for whatever reason. However, that depends on the expected ROI of spam on Lens - it will change together with the network size. It's possible to model all that. Would actually be fun.
- I think the cost principle should be the cost that the account/wallet owner defines, in addition to the cost of the network. For example, I could have a whitelist that would accept any submission to my wallet, whether based on followers or any other metric. But submissions that come from unknown addresses would have to pay me a value in a token defined by me and which would be sent along with the spam 😁
- I talked about this with @lens/christina a while back
I think without proper Sybil resistance there is no generalizable way to deal with bots onchain.
Multi-layered filtering approaches based on activity, assets and history can work great for older/more established wallets
However new (human) wallets and new bots are pretty much indistinguishable onchain. Especially because many real people surprisingly act like bots when $$ is ok the line (airdrops)
- right now the cost for an account is $ 15-20 on opensea and you can spam all you want; I haven't noticed much spam. $ 10 is a nice round number
implementing gatekeeping (invitations, connecting other social accounts, on chain gatekeeping like gitcoin passport, etc) can also help
moderation mechanics. here moderation is as important as builders. a sophisticated moderation solution funded into perpetuity has to happen (perhaps later through governance). lens alignment must be real
- There should be some additional value besides the 'spam-free' feature. Costs depend on this value which should be useful for real users but useless for spammers. X is a good example of that - blue is not only about mitigating spam
- Does it have to be a cost, or could it be a pledge? A funded wallet/account may merely need funds staked for proof of human, rather than pay to post… then spam could be disincentivized in the form of penalties… and rewards earned for verified content interactions at the protocol level… have not considered if this could be gamed easily, but it seems to work for validators.
- Do you really need to pay… if you have official id nft and zero knowledge proof people would know you are not a bot without knowing your identity but state would have a hand on the identity on which wallet… people wont spam anymore in that case… blue check on twitter dont take off spam plus we notice easily that only influencers use it and they spam in group to influence in a topic…. That is harmful annoying for policy topics or have a real eyesight on what people like and what is legit from outsider view
- Nano crypto does an age based system, can't spam with new accounts infinately.
- Could you define what you consider spam? Because for me that's the most complicated part. What really is spam on Lens?
A message that's not very elaborate, or hundreds of identical messages? Or AI content?
- Either you pay a fee per month to ditch giving your full identity to third party …or you dont pay and they have your identity
- ☝️👀
- raise 🤘🟣🔥