You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: My Steem Vision

in #dtube5 years ago

We can also look at a few of the abandoned visions:

None of these are bad. They just seem to have fizzled.

Here's mine. For Steem to become addictive, we need to understand: The Hierarchy of Engagement

Sort:  

Great additions Inertia, thank you.

How have I not read the world domination one yet? 👀 That’s a good one!

In a lot of ways, we are still on track for World Domination. We've had some setbacks, but we're still making progress.

Once you have a highly functional currency, a robust community and market place, and lots of content to bring in new users, you are ready to start building robust smart contracts and side chains around these assets.

Turns out, a lot of this stuff can be done in parallel or in spite of other stuff not coming together. E.g., strictly speaking, we don't really need a functioning native peg. Sure, it's nice to have, but not a requirement to launch sidechains.

The STEEM asset is stable enough to support "layer 2" soft-consensus. Stuff like that.

"Build your brand" (from "Hierarchy of engagement") is actually a "core action" worth thinking about.

For bloggers, each blog post builds their brand. Imagine simply naming the little pen symbol for starting a new post as "build your brand". With each post you publish, you create "a brand" of someone writing stuff worth reading.

The "World Domination" of dan is really an excellent vision I fully share. As you say, we are still on track, too bad we don't seem to have suitable leadership to progress at a meaningful pace toward "Emerald City"

Back then, “build your brand” was all I could come up. But now, it’s joined with “check your deck” on Steem Monsters and “stack your coins” on Steem Engine. I’m not into the DrugWars game, but I’m sure there’s a similar core action over there.

Yes, that is indeed the beauty of steem!

"To Be A Useful Currency" will always be important. Not much point in a cryptocurrency if it isn't useful as such. Or at least its success will always be limited.

Dan means pegged when he talks about useful. I’m not convinced a cryptocurrency must be pegged in order for it to be useful.

Yeah, i don't think any currency should be "pegged" and I'm pretty sure that would be counterproductive. Ultimately, stability is desirable of course but that isn't the way to do it. I think having something like SBD is potentially useful because of its relative stability but even that isn't pegged.

I agree. Dan is trying to achieve stability. I get that. He trying to speed up something artificially. Not that there’s anything wrong with that in an of itself.

But historically, artificial stability happens at the expense of fairness. So I’m just skeptical that it can be achieved fairly.

Just skeptical. I’m not saying he can’t do it. We don’t have to get hung up on it and stop progress waiting for this one aspect to get ironed out.