zkJewWhat is earnable proof of humanity and how should it work?
Proving you're human could be extremely rewarding, basing human verification on the idea of earnable proof of humanity points could revolutionize Lens Protocol. These innovative points allow you to earn credit for completing tasks attesting that you are more likely real person, and could potentially unlock a variety of benefits in the online world. In this article, you will discover how proof of humanity points can change the way we think about online security and verification, and how t...
zkJewPros and cons to a tiered Lens Profile system
Pros: Provides a variety of accessible options for users with differing amounts of freedom and economic support for the infrastructure. Provides an easy way to onboard users who do not care about social graphs but care about not getting their data farmed and having social graph sovereignty amongst a plethora of apps. Incentivizes users financially to use low tier lens profiles before ascending by providing a post-to-earn model. Provides a world-class UX for any normie and caters to a fully so...
zkJewWhat is earnable proof of humanity and how should it work?
Proving you're human could be extremely rewarding, basing human verification on the idea of earnable proof of humanity points could revolutionize Lens Protocol. These innovative points allow you to earn credit for completing tasks attesting that you are more likely real person, and could potentially unlock a variety of benefits in the online world. In this article, you will discover how proof of humanity points can change the way we think about online security and verification, and how t...
zkJewPros and cons to a tiered Lens Profile system
Pros: Provides a variety of accessible options for users with differing amounts of freedom and economic support for the infrastructure. Provides an easy way to onboard users who do not care about social graphs but care about not getting their data farmed and having social graph sovereignty amongst a plethora of apps. Incentivizes users financially to use low tier lens profiles before ascending by providing a post-to-earn model. Provides a world-class UX for any normie and caters to a fully so...
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Subscribe to zkJew
Subscribe to zkJew
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
Quick hitting, short form analysis on the short term effects of my wav3s experiment: Funds earned: roughly 3 WMATIC Funds put up for bounties: roughly 18 WMATIC Funds from bounties paid out: roughly 2.3 WMATC
Amount of engagement for me has risen about 4000% in total there have been 1800 engagements with my post. Collects of my posts is up from a total of 2 this month to 64. The amount of followers I’ve gained is 29 (about a 20% increase) Comparing the difference between my best amount of engagement to this engagement is a 500% increase. While this clearly isn’t a randomized double blind trial study. It is quite obvious that there could easily be a p value of less than 0.05 or a less than 5% chance that this likely significant difference. The one statistical that I would like to know that I am just going to estimate with moon math is distribution, but the difference between my best engagement and this period of time should serve as sufficient proof. If I have an average of 150 followers and get an average of 1 mirrorer with similar stats my distribution is probably about 280 profiles. So if you look at my bounties the mirroring of just those who were paid to mirror was about 2,200 adding other mirrors we can conservatively get to 3,000 profiles with overlap estimated already. This would be over a 10000% increase of distribution of my content from the real payment of about 2.3 WMATIC. The true yield is probably more like 5k profiles reached which would be 5% of the total lens ecosystem. That’s a serious bang for your buck in my opinion and that’s probably just because we are in beta that it’s that cheap. The biggest source of error in engagement could come from the amount I posted along side the bounties. I hope this is helpful to everyone! Distribution will bring disruption, say it loud, say it proud. Lens can maximize distribution with Wav3s . #LFG #LMCC #Bloomish
Quick hitting, short form analysis on the short term effects of my wav3s experiment: Funds earned: roughly 3 WMATIC Funds put up for bounties: roughly 18 WMATIC Funds from bounties paid out: roughly 2.3 WMATC
Amount of engagement for me has risen about 4000% in total there have been 1800 engagements with my post. Collects of my posts is up from a total of 2 this month to 64. The amount of followers I’ve gained is 29 (about a 20% increase) Comparing the difference between my best amount of engagement to this engagement is a 500% increase. While this clearly isn’t a randomized double blind trial study. It is quite obvious that there could easily be a p value of less than 0.05 or a less than 5% chance that this likely significant difference. The one statistical that I would like to know that I am just going to estimate with moon math is distribution, but the difference between my best engagement and this period of time should serve as sufficient proof. If I have an average of 150 followers and get an average of 1 mirrorer with similar stats my distribution is probably about 280 profiles. So if you look at my bounties the mirroring of just those who were paid to mirror was about 2,200 adding other mirrors we can conservatively get to 3,000 profiles with overlap estimated already. This would be over a 10000% increase of distribution of my content from the real payment of about 2.3 WMATIC. The true yield is probably more like 5k profiles reached which would be 5% of the total lens ecosystem. That’s a serious bang for your buck in my opinion and that’s probably just because we are in beta that it’s that cheap. The biggest source of error in engagement could come from the amount I posted along side the bounties. I hope this is helpful to everyone! Distribution will bring disruption, say it loud, say it proud. Lens can maximize distribution with Wav3s . #LFG #LMCC #Bloomish
No activity yet