Ah, you see: ideas are free! (sadly) Didn't know Tendermint chains did that.
That doesn't mean there cannot be two different burning mechanisms.
Some time ago. I investigated whether any real economies burnt their money - apart from online games that hold a tenuous link to reality, and to economics - and discovered the Penn Scrip. This is pre-hegemonic-US-dollar and, astonishingly, didn't collapse - was swallowed up anyway. What they did was burn taxes ie activity - they also only lent money to productive industries, hence not to banks. So, again, this was a money supply measure with a consequent price stability and an allowed inflation rate so long as it was matched by productivity. in the broad sense of productive activity.
The selling ads to burn tokens is narrow and would also rely on human intervention, unless the ads were internal - even then, what mechanism would price the ads? a bidding system? Who would use this? I'd have to think it through, though strikes me as a micro-economic measure rather than macro.
External ads would be more useful but would need some programmatic way to ensure that income is used as intended.
I think before a Hive Improvement Proposal, we need a Hive Improvement Team! A HIT anyone?!
I was thinking that maybe there could be a DSP that priced ads in tokens, which would force market makers (yes, there are MMs in the ad world too these days) to buy HIVE off exchanges to buy the inventory.
Posted Using LeoFinance
That'd be a great idea once Hive frontends became big enough properties to warrant the extra inconvenience (more likely coding by some media buyers/ad aggregators). In the beginning, it's not good business to make it harder for customers to give you money.