Author Topic: [ANN] THE SMART MONEY PROJECT: Mainstream Adoption Starts Here(FULL UPDATE Pg.9)  (Read 18217 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SolomonSollarsNSense

I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.  More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

 +5% Wisdom. Thanks for it  :)
If you like the content I make consider tipping me. Helps me keep those bitshare content babies popping like popcorn! Send tips to: solomonsollarsnsense

Offline dancingpenguins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.

I think you are oversimplifying the spread of hip hop in your analogy. I would argue that hip hop became popular in large part because it tapped into a kind of authenticity (the real world, on real streets, real life etc) that wasn't present in the music industry at the time. It continues to thrive on the sale of authenticity (whether real or imagined at this point is arguable).

However, that kind of "realness" is currently alive and well in the DIY film world and has been successfully coopted by Hollywood and TV producers long ago. I disagree that Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap. Sure, there's a lot of crap, a majority of crap even, but there are also some genuinely great films and shows that carry the industry. My point is that a show like The Wire (as an example of coopted "realness" that actually ends up being great - in the same way that a rapper like Kendrick Lamar can be coopted but also great) can't happen on a low budget. So, somewhere people with millions of dollars need to step in and say that they want to sell their product differently. The question is, why would they? I haven't seen a good explanation of how that is supposed to happen through Solomon's plan.

More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

It's one thing to say, "yeah, disrupt Hollywood!" and another to actually be able to do it. As far as I can tell, Solomon doesn't know anything about blockchain tech and he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not what supports this project - it is just an add-on to come later (??). To me that suggests that he is indeed trying to "ride the wave" but in name only as a way to extract money from people in this space, without giving back any of the empowering benefits of the blockchain.

It sounds like he's just proposing another centralized hosting platform. . . which adds nothing to the ecosystem and is unlikely to provide a return to his current or prospective supporters.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2016, 03:52:47 am by dancingpenguins »

Offline particlewave

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.

I think you are oversimplifying the spread of hip hop in your analogy. I would argue that hip hop became popular in large part because it tapped into a kind of authenticity (the real world, on real streets, real life etc) that wasn't present in the music industry at the time. It continues to thrive on the sale of authenticity (whether real or imagined at this point is arguable).

However, that kind of "realness" is currently alive and well in the DIY film world and has been successfully coopted by Hollywood and TV producers long ago. I disagree that Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap. Sure, there's a lot of crap, a majority of crap even, but there are also some genuinely great films and shows that carry the industry. My point is that a show like The Wire (as an example of coopted "realness" that actually ends up being great - in the same way that a rapper like Kendrick Lamar can be coopted but also great) can't happen on a low budget. So, somewhere people with millions of dollars need to step in and say that they want to sell their product differently. The question is, why would they? I haven't seen a good explanation of how that is supposed to happen through Solomon's plan.

More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

It's one thing to say, "yeah, disrupt Hollywood!" and another to actually be able to do it. As far as I can tell, Solomon doesn't know anything about blockchain tech and he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not what supports this project - it is just an add-on to come later (??). To me that suggests that he is indeed trying to "ride the wave" but in name only as a way to extract money from people in this space, without giving back any of the empowering benefits of the blockchain.

It sounds like he's just proposing another centralized hosting platform. . . which adds nothing to the ecosystem and is unlikely to provide a return to his current or prospective supporters.


@dancingpenquins, very inciteful post. Thanks.

The 'New Money Project Intro Hangout' youtube video defines Sollywood T.V. w/ SollarsNSense thusly:
"..is essentially a new online market place for content and content services with its own digital currency built-in [the] pricing."

The video suggests that content creators can adjust (dynamically?) their price to more aggressively create and/or match consumer demand.  Something big-box distributors (Netflix, cable, etc.) are unable or unwilling to do?
It suggests the greatest benefit to new and unknown content creators.  Pricing optimization (w/ low overhead) to attract a much wider viewership.  Throw in digital currency for the billions of 'unbanked' consumers.
I will assume the SollarsNSense service provider will allow users to create and manage their own personal content packages.
One differenitiator appears to be that with STV a first time moviemaker or videographer could create a some novel, short, quirky content (quirky today, mainstream hot tomorrow) and sell to millions with STV w/ SNS pricing management structure(s).
I can imagine a lot of ways in which such a flexible platform can quickly capture and capitalize on new and unique content attractions.
I would like to create a short with twenty different endings played randomly with each viewing.

So the question is, "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

Maybe the Kickstarter campaign will shed more light.

I would think that some component of this venture would have to be centralized (think Peertracks hosting server).

I agree with [member=25158]Vizzini[/member].  This is a mammoth undertaking.  A grand experiment, have you.  Isn't this what the cryptospace is all about?  No matter how well staffed you are the cryptograveyard will still overflow.  Much success to Sollywood.

BTW, great observation on hip hop.  Hip hop also came along at a time when music technology was taking a quantum leap and becoming a lot less expensive.  Sometimes an order of magnitude less expensive ($8K hardware reverbs to software freeverbs, samplers, drum machines, studio on a laptop, etc.).
BTW, I never said "...Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap."  Please don't misquote misunderstand me.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2016, 09:01:20 pm by particlewave »

Offline SolomonSollarsNSense

I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.

I think you are oversimplifying the spread of hip hop in your analogy. I would argue that hip hop became popular in large part because it tapped into a kind of authenticity (the real world, on real streets, real life etc) that wasn't present in the music industry at the time. It continues to thrive on the sale of authenticity (whether real or imagined at this point is arguable).

However, that kind of "realness" is currently alive and well in the DIY film world and has been successfully coopted by Hollywood and TV producers long ago. I disagree that Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap. Sure, there's a lot of crap, a majority of crap even, but there are also some genuinely great films and shows that carry the industry. My point is that a show like The Wire (as an example of coopted "realness" that actually ends up being great - in the same way that a rapper like Kendrick Lamar can be coopted but also great) can't happen on a low budget. So, somewhere people with millions of dollars need to step in and say that they want to sell their product differently. The question is, why would they? I haven't seen a good explanation of how that is supposed to happen through Solomon's plan.

More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

It's one thing to say, "yeah, disrupt Hollywood!" and another to actually be able to do it. As far as I can tell, Solomon doesn't know anything about blockchain tech and he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not what supports this project - it is just an add-on to come later (??). To me that suggests that he is indeed trying to "ride the wave" but in name only as a way to extract money from people in this space, without giving back any of the empowering benefits of the blockchain.

It sounds like he's just proposing another centralized hosting platform. . . which adds nothing to the ecosystem and is unlikely to provide a return to his current or prospective supporters.


@dancingpenquins, very inciteful post. Thanks.

The 'New Money Project Intro Hangout' youtube video defines Sollywood T.V. w/ SollarsNSense thusly:
"..is essentially a new online market place for content and content services with its own digital currency built-in [the] pricing."

The video suggests that content creators can adjust (dynamically?) their price to more aggressively create and/or match consumer demand.  Something big-box distributors (Netflix, cable, etc.) are unable or unwilling to do?
It suggests the greatest benefit to new and unknown content creators.  Pricing optimization (w/ low overhead) to attract a much wider viewership.  Throw in digital currency for the billions of 'unbanked' consumers.
I will assume the SollarsNSense service provider will allow users to create and manage their own personal content packages.
One differenitiator appears to be that with STV a first time moviemaker or videographer could create a some novel, short, quirky content (quirky today, mainstream hot tomorrow) and sell to millions with STV w/ SNS pricing management structure(s).
I can imagine a lot of ways in which such a flexible platform can quickly capture and capitalize on new and unique content attractions.
I would like to create a short with twenty different endings played randomly with each viewing.

So the question is, "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

Maybe the Kickstarter campaign will shed more light.

I would think that some component of this venture would have to be centralized (think Peertracks hosting server).

I agree with [member=25158]Vizzini[/member].  This is a mammoth undertaking.  A grand experiment, have you.  Isn't this what the cryptospace is all about?  No matter how well staffed you are the cryptograveyard will still overflow.  Much success to Sollywood.

BTW, great observation on hip hop.  Hip hop also came along at a time when music technology was taking a quantum leap and becoming a lot less expensive.  Sometimes an order of magnitude less expensive ($8K hardware reverbs to software freeverbs, samplers, drum machines, studio on a laptop, etc.).
BTW, I never said "...Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap."  Please don't misquote misunderstand me.

Wow ParticleWave... Are you sure I meant all of that? You sure Im not just an incompetent blowhard that's out to scam everyone? Surely I could not have meant all of that. Surely you've got the wrong guy  ::)

Thank you sir for truly understanding what we are doing here. I could not have said it any better  :D Full technical update on MVP coming very soon. Stay tuned.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2016, 01:44:07 am by SolomonSollarsNSense »
If you like the content I make consider tipping me. Helps me keep those bitshare content babies popping like popcorn! Send tips to: solomonsollarsnsense

Offline SolomonSollarsNSense

I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.

I think you are oversimplifying the spread of hip hop in your analogy. I would argue that hip hop became popular in large part because it tapped into a kind of authenticity (the real world, on real streets, real life etc) that wasn't present in the music industry at the time. It continues to thrive on the sale of authenticity (whether real or imagined at this point is arguable).

However, that kind of "realness" is currently alive and well in the DIY film world and has been successfully coopted by Hollywood and TV producers long ago. I disagree that Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap. Sure, there's a lot of crap, a majority of crap even, but there are also some genuinely great films and shows that carry the industry. My point is that a show like The Wire (as an example of coopted "realness" that actually ends up being great - in the same way that a rapper like Kendrick Lamar can be coopted but also great) can't happen on a low budget. So, somewhere people with millions of dollars need to step in and say that they want to sell their product differently. The question is, why would they? I haven't seen a good explanation of how that is supposed to happen through Solomon's plan.

More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

It's one thing to say, "yeah, disrupt Hollywood!" and another to actually be able to do it. As far as I can tell, Solomon doesn't know anything about blockchain tech and he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not what supports this project - it is just an add-on to come later (??). To me that suggests that he is indeed trying to "ride the wave" but in name only as a way to extract money from people in this space, without giving back any of the empowering benefits of the blockchain.

It sounds like he's just proposing another centralized hosting platform. . . which adds nothing to the ecosystem and is unlikely to provide a return to his current or prospective supporters.


@dancingpenquins, very inciteful post. Thanks.

The 'New Money Project Intro Hangout' youtube video defines Sollywood T.V. w/ SollarsNSense thusly:
"..is essentially a new online market place for content and content services with its own digital currency built-in [the] pricing."

The video suggests that content creators can adjust (dynamically?) their price to more aggressively create and/or match consumer demand.  Something big-box distributors (Netflix, cable, etc.) are unable or unwilling to do?
It suggests the greatest benefit to new and unknown content creators.  Pricing optimization (w/ low overhead) to attract a much wider viewership.  Throw in digital currency for the billions of 'unbanked' consumers.
I will assume the SollarsNSense service provider will allow users to create and manage their own personal content packages.
One differenitiator appears to be that with STV a first time moviemaker or videographer could create a some novel, short, quirky content (quirky today, mainstream hot tomorrow) and sell to millions with STV w/ SNS pricing management structure(s).
I can imagine a lot of ways in which such a flexible platform can quickly capture and capitalize on new and unique content attractions.
I would like to create a short with twenty different endings played randomly with each viewing.

So the question is, "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

Maybe the Kickstarter campaign will shed more light.

I would think that some component of this venture would have to be centralized (think Peertracks hosting server).

I agree with [member=25158]Vizzini[/member].  This is a mammoth undertaking.  A grand experiment, have you.  Isn't this what the cryptospace is all about?  No matter how well staffed you are the cryptograveyard will still overflow.  Much success to Sollywood.

BTW, great observation on hip hop.  Hip hop also came along at a time when music technology was taking a quantum leap and becoming a lot less expensive.  Sometimes an order of magnitude less expensive ($8K hardware reverbs to software freeverbs, samplers, drum machines, studio on a laptop, etc.).
BTW, I never said "...Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap."  Please don't misquote misunderstand me.

Particle I feel I owe you a response since you actually took the time to understand the opportunity EVEN if everything was not crystal clear. Thank you for that.

The video suggests that content creators can adjust (dynamically?) their price to more aggressively create and/or match consumer demand.  Something big-box distributors (Netflix, cable, etc.) are unable or unwilling to do?

Yes we will look to have adjustible/flexible pricing (Uber SURGE  :P) eventually as that algorithm/automation would take care of scaling the product to a platform and also scaling the content creator acquisition process that will be needed should things really pick up. BUT this will not be done for the MVP. Its simply not necessary. We can simply manually price content at a given lower price point (x) and manually adjust it if need be. The automation of this is in the pipeline as a feature.

Yes you are right. Big box distributors (as I mentioned countless times in many of the videos) will not work with certain content creators simply because it does not fit their business model. They cannot make any money off of them. These type of content creators that are being ignored come with their own audience that would surely adopt this currency as you stated because of price optimization which is the key to our platform and also changing the Cable industry.

Consumers only have so much time in a day. And who ever is giving them content at the right price is who will win in the end.

It suggests the greatest benefit to new and unknown content creators.  Pricing optimization (w/ low overhead) to attract a much wider viewership.  Throw in digital currency for the billions of 'unbanked' consumers...

Seems you are picking up fast. Just don't start your own currency. Support mine!  ;D

I will assume the SollarsNSense service provider will allow users to create and manage their own personal content packages

Yes eventually... But this will be highly strategic in the beginning. Our adoption will depend on it. We cannot start as an open platform for everything as that will most likely taint our image in the same way it has done Streamium/WatchMyBit and others in the space. We want to be known as the Final Nail in Cable TV's coffin. To garner and keep that image will take more marketing than programming. I explained my thought briefly with Thom HERE

One differenitiator appears to be that with STV a first time moviemaker or videographer could create a some novel, short, quirky content (quirky today, mainstream hot tomorrow) and sell to millions with STV w/ SNS pricing management structure(s).

Man I beg you don't start your own currency. :D Nice abbreviations by the way.

I can imagine a lot of ways in which such a flexible platform can quickly capture and capitalize on new and unique content attractions.
I would like to create a short with twenty different endings played randomly with each viewing.


You and me both sir  :D Just aaaaaaaaallllll the possibilities. The rabbit hole of revenue models goes DEEP. Its new money we are talking here. But again we have to be strategic. Not get ahead of ourselves as that is the typical crypto thing to do. Just crank out feature after feature without an audience or other important considerations being prioritized.

So the question is, "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

Maybe the Kickstarter campaign will shed more light.

I would think that some component of this venture would have to be centralized (think Peertracks hosting server).


The short and immediate answer is SoLCerts. Long term if people are US investors we will be raising traditional rounds for Sollywood TV as a start up (similar to PeerTracks). But the ultimate long term value is Sollars and Sense as its own blockchain which it will be and based on Bitshares open-sourced code. And SoLCert holders will get first dibs on Sollars that launch with that blockchain.

The next answer is yes the KickStarter as that will reveal more of the roadmap/MVP/Device strategy.

And Sollywood TV is a business on a blockchain so yes we are centralized but Bitshares (which is what we are building on) is not. This has always been the case and is not some new development. Again it was explained clearly in the SoLCert series.

We can have a debate all day about what is best for technical architecture but since we are pursuing Agile development with the MVP things can be accommodated if necessary.

The marketing of Decentralization has failed. Its useless and does nothing for the consumer. Experience is still king and that is what we will focus on when reaching mainstream consumers. Not some programmers fantasy of technology selling itself.

What is most important right now is reaching our target demographic with a story they can connect with. Before I was in computer science/crypto-currency I was a filmmaker for 12 years. Hopefully my skills and nickname have done me well. I am one of those content creators who needed a platform like what I am trying to start with this project. It is what got me into all of this in the first place. And I know many others who would kill to be able to price and make a living off what they have created. And actually make above 50% of what comes in. Let alone 80-90%

Truth is Bitshares future is bright. Its got three projects now that are aimed squarely at a mainstream audience. And I wish Steem and PeerPlay all the best. At the end of the day its these types of businesses along with Sollywood TV that are going to bring mainstream adoption to this technology.

Yes there is competition. But who cares. Lets see where everyone is at in 5 years.

« Last Edit: May 04, 2016, 02:21:12 am by SolomonSollarsNSense »
If you like the content I make consider tipping me. Helps me keep those bitshare content babies popping like popcorn! Send tips to: solomonsollarsnsense

Offline konelectric

I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

I'm interested in hearing these answers too.  I scoured all over for the whitepaper that will talk about delivery mechanisms, but couldn't find anything.  There was a reference to "read the whitepaper" at the end of one of the videos, with no link in the youtube description.

If anyone understands what a mammoth undertaking this is...  it's going to take a long time, a lot of money, and a lot of bumps in the road.

If I stood up and said my name is Gary, and I've got a project called Gollars and Gents, to revolutionize the airline industry. Please buy into my ICO, and I'll release the fine details later.  (Right now I just have overview and faq material out), you would all probably tell me to get lost. :)

Crypto4Ever I'd like to see you try that. Start your own project called Gollars and Gents and see if people will buy into your ICO. I would like to see exactly what happens. Maybe you are just like me and can do exactly what I can do...

Or maybe not.

Everything in life is a mammoth undertaking. That's not new but it is the American way to take that risk and pursue it. And why we stand out from the rest of the world. I am honored that people donated to this project and believed in my ability. At the end that is what will make this project sink or swim.

All questions have been answered either by the current content or the FAQs page which can be found on the OP. I'm working. Regards.

(cross-posted from bitcointalk)

Nope, they have not. I have actually read, for better or worse, most of your blog posts about the project and it is mostly a marketing tool with very little information about the direction of your project. To say that my questions have been answered is disingenuous and the kind of answer you get from a developer who has no answers because they have no project.

Let's take these questions one by one, so it's not as overwhelming. We should start with the simplest and maybe most important question. If you don't have an answer to this, you don't have any way to provide a return to your backers.

Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?

I'll give you two examples to illustrate the problem:

1) Louis CK has a series online called Horace and Pete available for sale through PayPal or Bitcoin. This is a centralized model for selling content that exists right now without Sollywood. What can you offer him in return for the 10-20% fee you propose to take? Why would he, as content creator, provide his content through you?

2) Ujo Music is a decentralized service (a work in progress) that allows direct payments and content distribution between artists and customers without the need for centralized hosting or payment architectures. It will hopefully lead to a sophisticated micropayment system that works behind the scenes, so to speak, so that customers are charged only for the content they consume but without the burden of actively purchasing every piece of content themselves. This will most likely lead to services for other forms of media. THIS is the real "new apple" route that you keep trying to align yourself with. So, again, why would anyone use a service that takes a 10-20% fee when they have this option?

Anyone can sale what they have on their own. Quit easy these days with the internet. But people still flock to pawn shop and auction. Why? Because they have a larger audience then anyone individual could ever have. That why artist will pay an expert a % of their earnings. Artist are experts at making movies. And platform (Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, HBO, Sollywoodtv?) are experts at getting an audience. Win win!
Tweeter: Konelectric. Steemit: Konelectric. Youtube: Patrick Konshak. Success Council: Yourship. Mumble: Yourship or Konelectric.

Offline dancingpenguins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.

I think you are oversimplifying the spread of hip hop in your analogy. I would argue that hip hop became popular in large part because it tapped into a kind of authenticity (the real world, on real streets, real life etc) that wasn't present in the music industry at the time. It continues to thrive on the sale of authenticity (whether real or imagined at this point is arguable).

However, that kind of "realness" is currently alive and well in the DIY film world and has been successfully coopted by Hollywood and TV producers long ago. I disagree that Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap. Sure, there's a lot of crap, a majority of crap even, but there are also some genuinely great films and shows that carry the industry. My point is that a show like The Wire (as an example of coopted "realness" that actually ends up being great - in the same way that a rapper like Kendrick Lamar can be coopted but also great) can't happen on a low budget. So, somewhere people with millions of dollars need to step in and say that they want to sell their product differently. The question is, why would they? I haven't seen a good explanation of how that is supposed to happen through Solomon's plan.

More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

It's one thing to say, "yeah, disrupt Hollywood!" and another to actually be able to do it. As far as I can tell, Solomon doesn't know anything about blockchain tech and he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not what supports this project - it is just an add-on to come later (??). To me that suggests that he is indeed trying to "ride the wave" but in name only as a way to extract money from people in this space, without giving back any of the empowering benefits of the blockchain.

It sounds like he's just proposing another centralized hosting platform. . . which adds nothing to the ecosystem and is unlikely to provide a return to his current or prospective supporters.


@dancingpenquins, very inciteful post. Thanks.

The 'New Money Project Intro Hangout' youtube video defines Sollywood T.V. w/ SollarsNSense thusly:
"..is essentially a new online market place for content and content services with its own digital currency built-in [the] pricing."

The video suggests that content creators can adjust (dynamically?) their price to more aggressively create and/or match consumer demand.  Something big-box distributors (Netflix, cable, etc.) are unable or unwilling to do?
It suggests the greatest benefit to new and unknown content creators.  Pricing optimization (w/ low overhead) to attract a much wider viewership.  Throw in digital currency for the billions of 'unbanked' consumers.
I will assume the SollarsNSense service provider will allow users to create and manage their own personal content packages.
One differenitiator appears to be that with STV a first time moviemaker or videographer could create a some novel, short, quirky content (quirky today, mainstream hot tomorrow) and sell to millions with STV w/ SNS pricing management structure(s).
I can imagine a lot of ways in which such a flexible platform can quickly capture and capitalize on new and unique content attractions.
I would like to create a short with twenty different endings played randomly with each viewing.

So the question is, "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

Maybe the Kickstarter campaign will shed more light.

I would think that some component of this venture would have to be centralized (think Peertracks hosting server).

I agree with [member=25158]Vizzini[/member].  This is a mammoth undertaking.  A grand experiment, have you.  Isn't this what the cryptospace is all about?  No matter how well staffed you are the cryptograveyard will still overflow.  Much success to Sollywood.

BTW, great observation on hip hop.  Hip hop also came along at a time when music technology was taking a quantum leap and becoming a lot less expensive.  Sometimes an order of magnitude less expensive ($8K hardware reverbs to software freeverbs, samplers, drum machines, studio on a laptop, etc.).
BTW, I never said "...Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap."  Please don't misquote misunderstand me.

Thanks for the civil and direct response. I'd like to discuss the development of hip hop further but I guess this is not the place.

I'll take up 3 points:

1) Peertracks

Yes, Peertracks is an interesting model that might work for indie music artists/producers. I can also see that this might apply for some niche between Vimeo/Youtube productions and big time Hollywood/TV productions. But there are a lot of issues around Solomon's pitch. First, a blockchain is central to the Peertracks model, not an add-on. As I mentioned earlier, he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not central to this project, making it absolutely nothing like Peertracks. Second, they charge 5% rather than 20% because of their use of the blockchain and this charge can ultimately be reduced to near zero with some further decentralization adjustments. Third, even if he changes his mind on the importance of a blockchain to his project, Solomon cannot develop something like Peertracks himself because he doesn't have the technical know-how (from reading his material, he doesn't even seem able to distinguish the terms "DAC" and "blockchain"). From what I understand of Peertracks, they started out with a team ready to make the product. Solomon already asked for money once (presale) and is now asking for more money (current sale) to get even more money (kickstarter) to get a team to work for him to do this project! Even if you trust his intentions (and I raise doubts over this in part because of the pyramid scheme-like structure here), you have to question his ability to get this done. I believe it is naive to assume that the are blockchain developers lined up out to door to work with him on this and the MUSE developer has already distanced himself from this project.

To take this back to my original question (#4) - do big budget productions need to be a part of this project? (Solomon has suggested they will be) And if so, why will they give up what they have to switch over? It's possible that this project (if it solved all the other problems I've raised) could be a disruptive force to big media. Maybe people start watching a lot of low and mid-budget online content. Maybe because of this some big producers experiment with the new model. Maybe they're successful and then the flood gates open! But that's an awful lot of maybes and frankly, Solomon has not presented any of the whys very convincingly (why will people leave their beloved big budget shows and films and/or why will big budget producers make the switch?) and yet still claims with unreasonable confidence that his project is the next big thing. 

2) "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

To me this question is actually a big problem that cryptospace needs to deal with. The great thing about the blockchain and smart contracts is that we can finally get rid of the middleman who takes a profit from mediating the transfer of goods and services. That transfer becomes automated and directly connects consumers to producers. The result is an intense disintermediation that pushes an investment return in the system towards zero. I think (hope?) open source will quickly shift services like Peertracks and Solomon's proposal to near-zero fee transactions. That's why I question the 10-20% fee structure he proposes. At 5%, Peertracks shows us that this is already problematic, and Peertracks will also be pushed towards zero. I believe that we need to come to terms with the fact that there will be no investment returns for many very important projects but that does not mean we should not still be funding them because they have a very good chance of making the world a better place.

3) digital currency for the unbanked

The "unbanked" already have access to many digital currencies.  Do they need another one just to consume media? There are many interesting applications that cryptocurrency might offer to the world's poorest people (I believe this is often overstated by bitcoin/altcoin spokespeople but I guess that's another conversation) but I don't really see this project as one of them.

Offline dancingpenguins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Quote from: SolomonSollarsNSense
And Sollywood TV is a business on a blockchain so yes we are centralized but Bitshares (which is what we are building on) is not. This has always been the case and is not some new development. Again it was explained clearly in the SoLCert series.

One of the biggest problems with your explanations is your clarity around the role of your blockchain. You cannot say that you are building a business on a blockchain and then say things like:

Our goal for the crowdfunder is NOT to build some new blockchain. That is unnecessary and irrelevant. It is also why we have Bitshares. What our goal is is to take advantage of the American trend of cord-cutting and introduce what may very well be the "final nail" in Cable TV. That does not take blockchain. It takes $ense. (from bitcointalk thread)

How are you "powered by bitshares" (as you say over at bitcointalk) apart from having a crowdsale? You keep referencing MUSE / Peertracks but your project is not like Peertracks unless the entire system functions on the blockchain as theirs does. How does this happen if you dispense with a blockchain?

Quote from: SolomonSollarsNSense
The marketing of Decentralization has failed. Its useless and does nothing for the consumer. Experience is still king and that is what we will focus on when reaching mainstream consumers. Not some programmers fantasy of technology selling itself.

Why do decentralization and experience have to mutually exclusive? Of course decentralization offers a great deal to both consumers and producers (it's actually hilarious that you say that, while at the same time emphasizing the importance of a blockchain), particularly in the form of reduced costs/increased returns. There should be no difficulty in build a great experience on top of a decentralized system - which is what Peertracks seems to be trying to do.

Offline SolomonSollarsNSense

I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

I'm interested in hearing these answers too.  I scoured all over for the whitepaper that will talk about delivery mechanisms, but couldn't find anything.  There was a reference to "read the whitepaper" at the end of one of the videos, with no link in the youtube description.

If anyone understands what a mammoth undertaking this is...  it's going to take a long time, a lot of money, and a lot of bumps in the road.

If I stood up and said my name is Gary, and I've got a project called Gollars and Gents, to revolutionize the airline industry. Please buy into my ICO, and I'll release the fine details later.  (Right now I just have overview and faq material out), you would all probably tell me to get lost. :)

Crypto4Ever I'd like to see you try that. Start your own project called Gollars and Gents and see if people will buy into your ICO. I would like to see exactly what happens. Maybe you are just like me and can do exactly what I can do...

Or maybe not.

Everything in life is a mammoth undertaking. That's not new but it is the American way to take that risk and pursue it. And why we stand out from the rest of the world. I am honored that people donated to this project and believed in my ability. At the end that is what will make this project sink or swim.

All questions have been answered either by the current content or the FAQs page which can be found on the OP. I'm working. Regards.

(cross-posted from bitcointalk)

Nope, they have not. I have actually read, for better or worse, most of your blog posts about the project and it is mostly a marketing tool with very little information about the direction of your project. To say that my questions have been answered is disingenuous and the kind of answer you get from a developer who has no answers because they have no project.

Let's take these questions one by one, so it's not as overwhelming. We should start with the simplest and maybe most important question. If you don't have an answer to this, you don't have any way to provide a return to your backers.

Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?

I'll give you two examples to illustrate the problem:

1) Louis CK has a series online called Horace and Pete available for sale through PayPal or Bitcoin. This is a centralized model for selling content that exists right now without Sollywood. What can you offer him in return for the 10-20% fee you propose to take? Why would he, as content creator, provide his content through you?

2) Ujo Music is a decentralized service (a work in progress) that allows direct payments and content distribution between artists and customers without the need for centralized hosting or payment architectures. It will hopefully lead to a sophisticated micropayment system that works behind the scenes, so to speak, so that customers are charged only for the content they consume but without the burden of actively purchasing every piece of content themselves. This will most likely lead to services for other forms of media. THIS is the real "new apple" route that you keep trying to align yourself with. So, again, why would anyone use a service that takes a 10-20% fee when they have this option?

Anyone can sale what they have on their own. Quit easy these days with the internet. But people still flock to pawn shop and auction. Why? Because they have a larger audience then anyone individual could ever have. That why artist will pay an expert a % of their earnings. Artist are experts at making movies. And platform (Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, HBO, Sollywoodtv?) are experts at getting an audience. Win win!

 +5% +5% +5%
If you like the content I make consider tipping me. Helps me keep those bitshare content babies popping like popcorn! Send tips to: solomonsollarsnsense

Offline particlewave

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.

I think you are oversimplifying the spread of hip hop in your analogy. I would argue that hip hop became popular in large part because it tapped into a kind of authenticity (the real world, on real streets, real life etc) that wasn't present in the music industry at the time. It continues to thrive on the sale of authenticity (whether real or imagined at this point is arguable).

However, that kind of "realness" is currently alive and well in the DIY film world and has been successfully coopted by Hollywood and TV producers long ago. I disagree that Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap. Sure, there's a lot of crap, a majority of crap even, but there are also some genuinely great films and shows that carry the industry. My point is that a show like The Wire (as an example of coopted "realness" that actually ends up being great - in the same way that a rapper like Kendrick Lamar can be coopted but also great) can't happen on a low budget. So, somewhere people with millions of dollars need to step in and say that they want to sell their product differently. The question is, why would they? I haven't seen a good explanation of how that is supposed to happen through Solomon's plan.

More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

It's one thing to say, "yeah, disrupt Hollywood!" and another to actually be able to do it. As far as I can tell, Solomon doesn't know anything about blockchain tech and he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not what supports this project - it is just an add-on to come later (??). To me that suggests that he is indeed trying to "ride the wave" but in name only as a way to extract money from people in this space, without giving back any of the empowering benefits of the blockchain.

It sounds like he's just proposing another centralized hosting platform. . . which adds nothing to the ecosystem and is unlikely to provide a return to his current or prospective supporters.


@dancingpenquins, very inciteful post. Thanks.

The 'New Money Project Intro Hangout' youtube video defines Sollywood T.V. w/ SollarsNSense thusly:
"..is essentially a new online market place for content and content services with its own digital currency built-in [the] pricing."

The video suggests that content creators can adjust (dynamically?) their price to more aggressively create and/or match consumer demand.  Something big-box distributors (Netflix, cable, etc.) are unable or unwilling to do?
It suggests the greatest benefit to new and unknown content creators.  Pricing optimization (w/ low overhead) to attract a much wider viewership.  Throw in digital currency for the billions of 'unbanked' consumers.
I will assume the SollarsNSense service provider will allow users to create and manage their own personal content packages.
One differenitiator appears to be that with STV a first time moviemaker or videographer could create a some novel, short, quirky content (quirky today, mainstream hot tomorrow) and sell to millions with STV w/ SNS pricing management structure(s).
I can imagine a lot of ways in which such a flexible platform can quickly capture and capitalize on new and unique content attractions.
I would like to create a short with twenty different endings played randomly with each viewing.

So the question is, "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

Maybe the Kickstarter campaign will shed more light.

I would think that some component of this venture would have to be centralized (think Peertracks hosting server).

I agree with [member=25158]Vizzini[/member].  This is a mammoth undertaking.  A grand experiment, have you.  Isn't this what the cryptospace is all about?  No matter how well staffed you are the cryptograveyard will still overflow.  Much success to Sollywood.

BTW, great observation on hip hop.  Hip hop also came along at a time when music technology was taking a quantum leap and becoming a lot less expensive.  Sometimes an order of magnitude less expensive ($8K hardware reverbs to software freeverbs, samplers, drum machines, studio on a laptop, etc.).
BTW, I never said "...Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap."  Please don't misquote misunderstand me.

Thanks for the civil and direct response. I'd like to discuss the development of hip hop further but I guess this is not the place.

I'll take up 3 points:

1) Peertracks

Yes, Peertracks is an interesting model that might work for indie music artists/producers. I can also see that this might apply for some niche between Vimeo/Youtube productions and big time Hollywood/TV productions. But there are a lot of issues around Solomon's pitch. First, a blockchain is central to the Peertracks model, not an add-on. As I mentioned earlier, he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not central to this project, making it absolutely nothing like Peertracks. Second, they charge 5% rather than 20% because of their use of the blockchain and this charge can ultimately be reduced to near zero with some further decentralization adjustments. Third, even if he changes his mind on the importance of a blockchain to his project, Solomon cannot develop something like Peertracks himself because he doesn't have the technical know-how (from reading his material, he doesn't even seem able to distinguish the terms "DAC" and "blockchain"). From what I understand of Peertracks, they started out with a team ready to make the product. Solomon already asked for money once (presale) and is now asking for more money (current sale) to get even more money (kickstarter) to get a team to work for him to do this project! Even if you trust his intentions (and I raise doubts over this in part because of the pyramid scheme-like structure here), you have to question his ability to get this done. I believe it is naive to assume that the are blockchain developers lined up out to door to work with him on this and the MUSE developer has already distanced himself from this project.

To take this back to my original question (#4) - do big budget productions need to be a part of this project? (Solomon has suggested they will be) And if so, why will they give up what they have to switch over? It's possible that this project (if it solved all the other problems I've raised) could be a disruptive force to big media. Maybe people start watching a lot of low and mid-budget online content. Maybe because of this some big producers experiment with the new model. Maybe they're successful and then the flood gates open! But that's an awful lot of maybes and frankly, Solomon has not presented any of the whys very convincingly (why will people leave their beloved big budget shows and films and/or why will big budget producers make the switch?) and yet still claims with unreasonable confidence that his project is the next big thing. 

2) "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

To me this question is actually a big problem that cryptospace needs to deal with. The great thing about the blockchain and smart contracts is that we can finally get rid of the middleman who takes a profit from mediating the transfer of goods and services. That transfer becomes automated and directly connects consumers to producers. The result is an intense disintermediation that pushes an investment return in the system towards zero. I think (hope?) open source will quickly shift services like Peertracks and Solomon's proposal to near-zero fee transactions. That's why I question the 10-20% fee structure he proposes. At 5%, Peertracks shows us that this is already problematic, and Peertracks will also be pushed towards zero. I believe that we need to come to terms with the fact that there will be no investment returns for many very important projects but that does not mean we should not still be funding them because they have a very good chance of making the world a better place.

3) digital currency for the unbanked

The "unbanked" already have access to many digital currencies.  Do they need another one just to consume media? There are many interesting applications that cryptocurrency might offer to the world's poorest people (I believe this is often overstated by bitcoin/altcoin spokespeople but I guess that's another conversation) but I don't really see this project as one of them.

Your responses are definitely thought provoking.  Thanks again.

I'll take up 4 points:

1)  "The result is an intense disintermediation that pushes an investment return in the system towards zero."

I think you just sent a toxoplasmotic like shock wave through most of the crypto investment world.  Unfortunately, I agree with you on the inevitable outcome.
Not to go too much off topic but diminishing profit-driven investment opportunities pushes us closer to a universal minimum income socioeconomic system.  Not to say it would be a good or bad thing.  Could we be the first wave of a process that undulates between centralized and decentralized control to finally settle in to a quasi-decentralized transaction state?

2)  "I believe that we need to come to terms with the fact that there will be no investment returns for many very important projects but that does not mean we should not still be funding them because they have a very good chance of making the world a better place."

This suggests to me that once the SEC (U.S.A.) finally green lights (not to be confused with the criminal slang meaning) the equity crowdfunding JOBS Act (Title III) provision, crypto-presales, and ICOs may become a thing of the past, replaced with seriously regulated equity crowdfunding.  I don't quite understand the current concept of having a crowdfunding campaign after pre-sale and ICO to attract investors. But then again I am not an investment adviser or well-versed in investment science (pseudo-science?).  Note, I don't believe Solomon is the first to employ this strategy.

3)  "That's why I question the 10-20% fee structure he proposes."

I'm not sure about the viability of the fee structure.  However, thousands of app devs flock to Apple and Google and gleefully surrender 30% off the top.

4)  "The "unbanked" already have access to many digital currencies.  Do they need another one just to consume media?"

Seven hundred plus and counting crypto token makers seem to think so. :)  I know,  RIP.  Of course you could just color an existing coin or create a contract.  Solcerts has to be careful with obsolescence.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 12:09:56 am by particlewave »

Offline dancingpenguins

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
I'll post the same questions here, that were not responded to at bitcointalk:

This project seems like an overly complicated take on micropayments to which the new currency, Sollars, adds very little (do you have any thoughts on this?).

Good answers to a few questions would help ameliorate my skepticism:

1) You seem to have no experience with any kind of tech startup or blockchain project. Do you bring anything other than marketing to this project?

2) Why should anyone give you/your organization 10-20% of the earnings from their films when this whole payment process could easily be entirely decentralized? What is that fee for and why should it not go to the content creators? In short, why do content creators need you at all?
 
3) You seem to be using terms "DAC" and "blockchain" as equivalents, which is not how I understand them. Could you clarify what you mean by DAC and how a DAC fits into your long term plan?
 
4) Your analogy to Uber is problematic. Anyone with a car can be a taxi driver via Uber. Not just anyone can create high quality media content. Making blockbuster TV shows and films takes massive teams of people and large upfront investments. It seems to me that the success of your project depends crucially on convincing wealthy producers that your system will make them more money than the system already in place. How will you do this?

My two cents on 4).
Hip Hop,  an underground urban movement, develop in the South Bronx in New York City in the 1970's, became globally widespread in the late 1980s and by the 2000s became the most listened-to musical genre in the world (according to Spotify). It has now diversified into a global juggernaut with multi-million dollar tentacles into other music genres, the fashion industry, movies, gaming, advertising, etc.  Who would have ever believed it all started in the 'hood from humble ultra-low budget verbose expressions of street life?

The Hollywood movie and television industries' control and rigidity is just so outdated.  Unless you're totally into cookie cutter movies, fake reality shows, computer scripted news and sportscasts, etc.

I think you are oversimplifying the spread of hip hop in your analogy. I would argue that hip hop became popular in large part because it tapped into a kind of authenticity (the real world, on real streets, real life etc) that wasn't present in the music industry at the time. It continues to thrive on the sale of authenticity (whether real or imagined at this point is arguable).

However, that kind of "realness" is currently alive and well in the DIY film world and has been successfully coopted by Hollywood and TV producers long ago. I disagree that Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap. Sure, there's a lot of crap, a majority of crap even, but there are also some genuinely great films and shows that carry the industry. My point is that a show like The Wire (as an example of coopted "realness" that actually ends up being great - in the same way that a rapper like Kendrick Lamar can be coopted but also great) can't happen on a low budget. So, somewhere people with millions of dollars need to step in and say that they want to sell their product differently. The question is, why would they? I haven't seen a good explanation of how that is supposed to happen through Solomon's plan.

More power to grain cutters like Sollywood.  Amateur productions riding the blockchain wave will lead the revolution.

It's one thing to say, "yeah, disrupt Hollywood!" and another to actually be able to do it. As far as I can tell, Solomon doesn't know anything about blockchain tech and he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not what supports this project - it is just an add-on to come later (??). To me that suggests that he is indeed trying to "ride the wave" but in name only as a way to extract money from people in this space, without giving back any of the empowering benefits of the blockchain.

It sounds like he's just proposing another centralized hosting platform. . . which adds nothing to the ecosystem and is unlikely to provide a return to his current or prospective supporters.


@dancingpenquins, very inciteful post. Thanks.

The 'New Money Project Intro Hangout' youtube video defines Sollywood T.V. w/ SollarsNSense thusly:
"..is essentially a new online market place for content and content services with its own digital currency built-in [the] pricing."

The video suggests that content creators can adjust (dynamically?) their price to more aggressively create and/or match consumer demand.  Something big-box distributors (Netflix, cable, etc.) are unable or unwilling to do?
It suggests the greatest benefit to new and unknown content creators.  Pricing optimization (w/ low overhead) to attract a much wider viewership.  Throw in digital currency for the billions of 'unbanked' consumers.
I will assume the SollarsNSense service provider will allow users to create and manage their own personal content packages.
One differenitiator appears to be that with STV a first time moviemaker or videographer could create a some novel, short, quirky content (quirky today, mainstream hot tomorrow) and sell to millions with STV w/ SNS pricing management structure(s).
I can imagine a lot of ways in which such a flexible platform can quickly capture and capitalize on new and unique content attractions.
I would like to create a short with twenty different endings played randomly with each viewing.

So the question is, "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

Maybe the Kickstarter campaign will shed more light.

I would think that some component of this venture would have to be centralized (think Peertracks hosting server).

I agree with [member=25158]Vizzini[/member].  This is a mammoth undertaking.  A grand experiment, have you.  Isn't this what the cryptospace is all about?  No matter how well staffed you are the cryptograveyard will still overflow.  Much success to Sollywood.

BTW, great observation on hip hop.  Hip hop also came along at a time when music technology was taking a quantum leap and becoming a lot less expensive.  Sometimes an order of magnitude less expensive ($8K hardware reverbs to software freeverbs, samplers, drum machines, studio on a laptop, etc.).
BTW, I never said "...Hollywood / big TV producers only make crap."  Please don't misquote misunderstand me.

Thanks for the civil and direct response. I'd like to discuss the development of hip hop further but I guess this is not the place.

I'll take up 3 points:

1) Peertracks

Yes, Peertracks is an interesting model that might work for indie music artists/producers. I can also see that this might apply for some niche between Vimeo/Youtube productions and big time Hollywood/TV productions. But there are a lot of issues around Solomon's pitch. First, a blockchain is central to the Peertracks model, not an add-on. As I mentioned earlier, he has explicitly said that a blockchain is not central to this project, making it absolutely nothing like Peertracks. Second, they charge 5% rather than 20% because of their use of the blockchain and this charge can ultimately be reduced to near zero with some further decentralization adjustments. Third, even if he changes his mind on the importance of a blockchain to his project, Solomon cannot develop something like Peertracks himself because he doesn't have the technical know-how (from reading his material, he doesn't even seem able to distinguish the terms "DAC" and "blockchain"). From what I understand of Peertracks, they started out with a team ready to make the product. Solomon already asked for money once (presale) and is now asking for more money (current sale) to get even more money (kickstarter) to get a team to work for him to do this project! Even if you trust his intentions (and I raise doubts over this in part because of the pyramid scheme-like structure here), you have to question his ability to get this done. I believe it is naive to assume that the are blockchain developers lined up out to door to work with him on this and the MUSE developer has already distanced himself from this project.

To take this back to my original question (#4) - do big budget productions need to be a part of this project? (Solomon has suggested they will be) And if so, why will they give up what they have to switch over? It's possible that this project (if it solved all the other problems I've raised) could be a disruptive force to big media. Maybe people start watching a lot of low and mid-budget online content. Maybe because of this some big producers experiment with the new model. Maybe they're successful and then the flood gates open! But that's an awful lot of maybes and frankly, Solomon has not presented any of the whys very convincingly (why will people leave their beloved big budget shows and films and/or why will big budget producers make the switch?) and yet still claims with unreasonable confidence that his project is the next big thing. 

2) "How do I, as an investor, profit from this 'next level' content distribution/services model?"

To me this question is actually a big problem that cryptospace needs to deal with. The great thing about the blockchain and smart contracts is that we can finally get rid of the middleman who takes a profit from mediating the transfer of goods and services. That transfer becomes automated and directly connects consumers to producers. The result is an intense disintermediation that pushes an investment return in the system towards zero. I think (hope?) open source will quickly shift services like Peertracks and Solomon's proposal to near-zero fee transactions. That's why I question the 10-20% fee structure he proposes. At 5%, Peertracks shows us that this is already problematic, and Peertracks will also be pushed towards zero. I believe that we need to come to terms with the fact that there will be no investment returns for many very important projects but that does not mean we should not still be funding them because they have a very good chance of making the world a better place.

3) digital currency for the unbanked

The "unbanked" already have access to many digital currencies.  Do they need another one just to consume media? There are many interesting applications that cryptocurrency might offer to the world's poorest people (I believe this is often overstated by bitcoin/altcoin spokespeople but I guess that's another conversation) but I don't really see this project as one of them.

Your responses are definitely thought provoking.  Thanks again.

I'll take up 4 points:

1)  "The result is an intense disintermediation that pushes an investment return in the system towards zero."

I think you just sent a toxoplasmotic like shock wave through most of the crypto investment world.  Unfortunately, I agree with you on the inevitable outcome.
Not to go too much off topic but diminishing profit-driven investment opportunities pushes us closer to a universal minimum income socioeconomic system.  Not to say it would be a good or bad thing.  Could we be the first wave of a process that undulates between centralized and decentralized control to finally settle in to a quasi-decentralized transaction state?

2)  "I believe that we need to come to terms with the fact that there will be no investment returns for many very important projects but that does not mean we should not still be funding them because they have a very good chance of making the world a better place."

This suggests to me that once the SEC (U.S.A.) finally green lights (not to be confused with the criminal slang meaning) the equity crowdfunding JOBS Act (Title III) provision, crypto-presales, and ICOs may become a thing of the past, replaced with seriously regulated equity crowdfunding.  I don't quite understand the current concept of having a crowdfunding campaign after pre-sale and ICO to attract investors. But then again I am not an investment adviser or well-versed in investment science (pseudo-science?).  Note, I don't believe Solomon is the first to employ this strategy.

3)  "That's why I question the 10-20% fee structure he proposes."

I'm not sure about the viability of the fee structure.  However, thousands of app devs flock to Apple and Google and gleefully surrender 30% off the top.

4)  "The "unbanked" already have access to many digital currencies.  Do they need another one just to consume media?"

Seven hundred plus and counting crypto token makers seem to think so. :)  I know,  RIP.  Of course you could just color an existing coin or create a contract.  Solcerts has to be careful with obsolescence.

Regarding the Apple/Google comment, I think part of what initially irked me and raised some alarm bells around the project (apart from Solomon implying that I was just another troll/FUDer from the outset over at bitcointalk instead of attempting to deal with critical questions in a professional way) is that in the absolute best case scenario he seems to be selling an slightly more flexible version of iTunes+YouTube, but calling it "blockchain". A platform like this, without a blockchain element, might have some value, though I'm not confident about its potential longevity. However, as I've already said, he seems underqualified to build such a platform, and even if he could, why call it "blockchain" when a blockchain is not actually integral to the platform? It suggests to me that he's either confused about what he is proposing or dishonest - neither particularly good conclusions.

Anyway, since it seems like we agree on a lot of the other things you quoted (and Solomon refuses to respond to me), I guess I'll sign off for now. I'll try to remember to check back in sometime to see if there is a roadmap that makes more "$ense" than what is going on right now.

Offline SolomonSollarsNSense

NEW MONEY: SOLCERT ICO / SOLCERT BOUNTY CAMPAIGN IS NOW OFFICIALLY OVER

Thank you to everyone who participated. Phase 1 & 2 of this project (Pre-Sale and ICO) is now official over. In the coming days OpenLedger will begin the process of distributing SoLCerts to the various accounts who donated first. SoLCert Bounty participants will be the final recipients who receive SoLCerts based on their stakes.

Thank you to all who participated. In the coming days a detailed plan for Phase 3 will be posted and a new thread will be created for it. This thread unlike the last two will be moderated for staying on topic. I appreciate all who participated and helped get this project off the ground in a big way. Full details to come. Thanks.
If you like the content I make consider tipping me. Helps me keep those bitshare content babies popping like popcorn! Send tips to: solomonsollarsnsense

Offline konelectric

NEW MONEY: SOLCERT ICO / SOLCERT BOUNTY CAMPAIGN IS NOW OFFICIALLY OVER

Thank you to everyone who participated. Phase 1 & 2 of this project (Pre-Sale and ICO) is now official over. In the coming days OpenLedger will begin the process of distributing SoLCerts to the various accounts who donated first. SoLCert Bounty participants will be the final recipients who receive SoLCerts based on their stakes.

Thank you to all who participated. In the coming days a detailed plan for Phase 3 will be posted and a new thread will be created for it. This thread unlike the last two will be moderated for staying on topic. I appreciate all who participated and helped get this project off the ground in a big way. Full details to come. Thanks.

Looking forward for those mind blowing views.

My two $ents
Tweeter: Konelectric. Steemit: Konelectric. Youtube: Patrick Konshak. Success Council: Yourship. Mumble: Yourship or Konelectric.

Offline SolomonSollarsNSense

Hello everyone. Phase 3 basics has been posted to BitcoinTalk. You can check it out here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1433069.msg14857061#msg14857061

In the coming week a new moderated thread will be created for phase 3. Thanks to all who have participated so far. Your efforts will not go in vain. Time to move forward in a big way  ;)
If you like the content I make consider tipping me. Helps me keep those bitshare content babies popping like popcorn! Send tips to: solomonsollarsnsense

Offline Pheonike


Don't forget to post it on Steem too.