[teitoklien]

Not sure if its a good idea,

Email servers get hacked daily, If you’re auto-sending payment to receiver , now there is an incentive for hackers , to spam themselves with your inbox and you pay out of your wallet for that.

Now, yes one could say, that’s no problem just have a multi-wallet approval method , so unless the second one approves, it wont. But now that makes it a bit more complex, especially for newsletters where multiple recipients can be there.

Also, i just think overall Paying to send emails is lame... It sounds all cool and dandy, until it isn’t..

Getting spammed with newsletters from a writer ? Unsubscribe (and if they still continue , mark as spam)

Having to pay to send newsletters, now just adds an extra step for new newsletter authors to fight against fraud , and constantly calculate if its worth it to send emails to a person, and when they’ll stop sending because of that. Pretty sure the receiver, wouldn’t be that much happy.

Nice idea though, Who knows, a refined version of it might make sense.

[burnished]

A sibling comment thread makes the observation that proof of work with variable volumes of work set for different groups could be a good system. Like setting the work needed for your newsletter to 0, and complete unknowns take two minutes of CPU time, that sort of thing.

[daniel-cussen]

Well in the mail you have to pay for the stamp. It's about a dollar. You could charge 10 cents...in fact, that's not a bad idea for a cryptocurrency.

[etothepii]

Because the existing crypto currencies support 10c transactions if they grow to any kind of audience!

[b112]

To be fair, if you bulk send via mail, you pay a very small fraction of normal postage.

A very small fraction.

4th class mail, sent to the occupant of every house, is very very cheap.

Really, the cost of adwork, logos, placement, 4 colour print is more expensive than post.

[thinkmassive]

This was one of the original motivations to develop technologies that made cryptocurrency possible. Adam Back released the first proof-of-work implementation, Hashcash, in 1997 as a denial-of-service countermeasure.

[csomar]

The money (probably crypto dust) should be burned instead of sent to the receiver. There should be just a proof of payment (or proof of burn). Could also be replaced with a proof of work for some hashing that the computer do.