Clone

75 posts

Clone banner
Clone

Clone

@clonefyi

Join our waiting list: https://t.co/Zi7gk1wadC

The Dirtyverse Se unió Aralık 2021
98 Siguiendo931 Seguidores
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
"Cue the rise of agentic capital. A new class of audience using autonomous AI agents trained on their taste to extend their own attention and spending." dirt-media.notion.site/The-future-of-…
English
0
0
1
19
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
👇
Ethan@ethankongee

I’ve been thinking about x402 and MPP, and it all comes down to a simple question: how does an agent pay? To answer that, you have to start with something more fundamental. Agents are not humans. As Andrej Karpathy describes, they behave more like ephemeral entities. You spin them up, give them a task, and they disappear once it’s done. They’re a bit like Mr. Meeseeks. They exist to complete a goal, not to persist. That alone breaks most of the assumptions the internet was built on. The early web didn’t have a native payment system. HTTP even defined a 402 Payment Required status code, but it was never really used in practice. As online payments became viable through companies like PayPal, the dominant model that emerged wasn’t per-transaction payments, but subscriptions. Instead of paying every time you read an article or used a product, you paid once and got bundled access over time. This reduced both transaction friction and decision fatigue, which made sense for humans. But agents don’t behave this way. When you spin up an agent, it exists for a specific task. You give it context, it executes, and then it’s gone. There’s no long-term relationship, no concept of loyalty, and no reason for it to subscribe to anything. It doesn’t make sense for something that lives for minutes to pay for a monthly plan it will never use again. Instead, agents need payments that are tied directly to the task they are performing. If an agent needs access to a piece of data, an API, or an article, it should be able to pay for that specific request and move on. The problem is that today’s payment flows are built for humans. A typical flow involves hitting a paywall, logging in, or entering credit card details through a UI. Many sites don’t even use HTTP status codes for this and instead handle everything in the frontend. That works for people, but for agents it’s too indirect and too complex. What agents need is something programmatic and immediate. Instead of redirecting to a payment page, an endpoint can simply return a 402 Payment Required response with instructions on how to pay. The agent can complete the transaction and retry the request, all within the protocol. This is the idea behind Coinbase’s x402. Stripe’s work on Model Payment Protocol is exploring a similar direction using more traditional payment rails. The details are still evolving, but the direction is clear. We are moving from a subscription-based model designed for humans to a transaction-based model designed for machines. In the future, payments will likely be abstracted away into an agent-level or system-level wallet, so agents don’t need to care about specific providers or SDKs. They will see a price, pay for the resource, and continue the task. The web was built for humans. The agentic web is being built for machines. And machines don’t subscribe. They transact.

ART
1
0
2
117
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
Clone is about building for that future: high-quality information, taste-based interpretation, and pathways toward transaction. 🐑
English
0
0
0
22
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
We think the next media interface won’t just be read by people. It will be parsed, evaluated, and acted on by agents acting on people’s behalf. If agents are going to discover, interpret, and eventually transact around media, they need machine-readable ways to do it.
English
1
0
0
27
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
Clone.fyi now speaks agent. We just shipped live agent-friendly endpoints so AI systems can discover Clone, understand what it does, and interact with it directly. We're filling the void in trustworthy, legible curation about news and culture.
English
1
0
4
112
vitalik.eth
vitalik.eth@VitalikButerin·
How I would do creator coins We've seen about 10 years of people trying to do content incentivization in crypto, from early-stage platforms like Bihu and Steemit, to BitClout in 2021, to Zora, to tipping features inside of decentralized social, and more. So far, I think we have not been very successful, and I think this is because the problem is fundamentally hard. First, my view of what the problem is. A major difference between doing "creator incentives" in the 00s vs doing them today, is that in the 00s, a primary problem was having not enough content at all. In the 20s, there's plenty of content, AI can generate an entire metaverse full of it for like $10. The problem is quality. And so your goal is not *incentivizing content*, it's *surfacing good content*. Personally, I think that the most successful example of creator incentives we've seen is Substack. To see why, take a look at the top 10: substack.com/leaderboard/te… substack.com/leaderboard/cu… substack.com/leaderboard/wo… Now, you may disagree with many of these authors. But I have no doubt that: 1. They are on the whole high quality, and contribute positively to the discussion 2. They are mostly people who would not have been elevated without Substack's presence So Substack is genuinely surfacing high quality and pluralism. Now, we can compare to creator coin projects. I don't want to pick on a single one, because I think there's a failure mode of the entire category. For example: Top Zora creator coins: coingecko.com/en/categories/… BitClout: businessofbusiness.com/articles/insid… Basically, the top 10 are people who already have very high social status, and who are often impressive but primarily for reasons other than the content they create. At the core, Substack is a simple subscription service: you pay $N per month, and you get to see the person's articles. But a big part of Substack's success is that they did not just set the mechanism and forget. Their launch process was very hands-on, deliberately seeding the platform with high-quality creators, based on a very particular vision of what kind of high-quality intellectual environment they wanted to foster, including giving selected people revenue guarantees. So now, let's get to one idea that I think could work (of course, coming up with new ideas is inherently a more speculative project than criticizing existing ones, and more prone to error). Create a DAO, that is *not* token-based. Instead, the inspiration should be Protocol Guild: there are N members, and they can (anonymously) vote new members in and out. If N gets above ~200, consider auto-splitting it. Importantly, do _not_ try to make the DAO universal or even industry-wide. Instead, embrace the opinionatedness. Be okay with having a dominant type of content (long-form writing, music, short-form video, long-form video, fiction, educational...), and be okay with having a dominant style (eg. country or region of origin, political viewpoint, if within crypto which projects you're most friendly to...). Hand-pick the initial membership set, in order to maximize its alignment with the desired style. The goal is to have a group that is larger than one creator and can accumulate a public brand and collectively bargain to seek revenue opportunities, but at the same time small enough that internal governance is tractable. Now, here is where the tokens come in. In general, one of my hypotheses this decade is that a large portion of effective governance mechanisms will all have the form factor of "large number of people and bots participating in a prediction market, with the output oracle being a diverse set of people optimized for mission alignment and capture resistance". In this case, what we do is: anyone can become a creator and create a creator coin, and then, if they get admitted to a creator DAO, a portion of their proceeds from the DAO are used to burn their creator coins. This way, the token speculators are NOT participating in a recursive-speculation attention game backed only by itself. Instead, they are specifically being predictors of what new creators the high-value creator DAOs will be willing to accept. At the same time, they also provide a valuable service to the creator DAOs: they are helping surface promising creators for the DAOs to choose from. So the ultimate decider of who rises and falls is not speculators, but high-value content creators (we make the assumption that good creators are also good judges of quality, which seems often true). Individual speculators can stay in the game and thrive to the extent that they do a good job of predicting the creator DAOs' actions.
English
881
387
2.9K
544.2K
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
Every tech cycle reinvents the magazine because media is still how we store status. The internet solved distribution, not value.
English
1
0
0
121
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
Media is still the best taste signal we have.
English
1
0
1
176
Clone retuiteado
Dirt
Dirt@dirtyverse·
Dirt tweet media
ZXX
0
2
13
620
Social Graph Ventures
Social Graph Ventures@socialgraphvc·
Advertising is the economic backbone of Web2. Nearly every major consumer internet business converged on ads because they’re flexible, scalable, and directly tied to usage. In crypto, advertising has been oddly sidelined. Ads are simply a revenue primitive, and onchain systems can reinvent them with transparency, opt-in data sharing, cryptographic attribution, and direct payouts to users and creators. If crypto embraces native advertising rails, where wallets replace cookies, smart contracts replace ad networks, and revenue flows settle instantly, this could unlock a massive new layer of sustainable monetization. Protocols could fund development without inflation, creators could earn without paywalls, and users could be paid for their attention instead of exploited for it.
English
3
0
9
2.1K
Clone retuiteado
Dirt
Dirt@dirtyverse·
Clone is for everyone that's still at the global village coffeehouse. ☕️🌍 clone.fyi
Dirt tweet mediaDirt tweet media
English
1
2
23
4.7K
Clone
Clone@clonefyi·
"It’s streaming vs. cable all over again. We're paying only for the voices we want to hear—but sometimes I want to discover a writer or a story I wasn’t looking for." gq.com/story/what-i-m…
English
0
0
1
225