Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks Please call it Facebucks
I'm not a WSJ subscriber, but from the Ars Technica writeup[1]:
> The Journal says that paying users would "reward the kind of genuine interaction that Facebook, beset by bots and hate speech, has been trying to encourage." But it's not clear how these payments would discourage bots or hate speech. To the contrary, botmakers would inevitably ramp up their efforts to generate fake traffic with bots in order to earn Facebook's cryptocurrency.
So they're either lying or stupid; probably the former, since they're an ad company, and have years of experience with "click fraud."
Then one is left to wonder why it makes sense to have a centralized cryptocurrency, instead of just a database. I imagine there are tax and regulatory advantages versus just being honest and becoming a payment processor. No chargebacks, for example.
4 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 18.6 ms ] thread> The Journal says that paying users would "reward the kind of genuine interaction that Facebook, beset by bots and hate speech, has been trying to encourage." But it's not clear how these payments would discourage bots or hate speech. To the contrary, botmakers would inevitably ramp up their efforts to generate fake traffic with bots in order to earn Facebook's cryptocurrency.
So they're either lying or stupid; probably the former, since they're an ad company, and have years of experience with "click fraud."
Then one is left to wonder why it makes sense to have a centralized cryptocurrency, instead of just a database. I imagine there are tax and regulatory advantages versus just being honest and becoming a payment processor. No chargebacks, for example.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/05/report-facebook-...