The situation keeps right on going.
It was announced that Steem did a soft-fork, on top of its most recent hard-fork, to freeze the account of Community321.
In this video I discuss what is taking place and how important a lesson it is in the history of cryptocurrency.
Here is the article mentioned in the video.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/steem-soft-forks-to-sanction-mysterious-community321-account
▶️ 3Speak
Hmmm.
I just left an upvote and it was worth -2.09. Don't quite know what happened...
I simultaneously like the idea of a social credit score, where bad actors are affected negatively. I like it because someone like Sun would not be able to just buy and destroy another blockchain (or inadvertently have it move and become stronger). I don't like it because it becomes something that is somehow judged and weighed and measured. I like the idea of a blockchain existing, all of your information being there, all of your transactions, and anyone interested being able to guage the "good" or "bad" of your work on their own.
I did notice that my upvote on the steem blockchain is worth more, and also noticed that I can't get any steem out of my account. What are people using nowadays to trade steem? Blocktrades, Bittrex, and Ionomy all seem to not want to play.
Maybe you mistakenly downvoted.
Posted Using LeoFinance
What a fuster cluck. This is getting better and better.
I told 'a community leader' a couple of years ago that if he wanted to be famous as well as rich he should figure out how to make Steem an inheritable asset. If it is able to be legally inherited then it is real property. I still believe that.
Theft is a really good word. Call it a shovel, not a spade.
More Popcorn!
steem was a beehive and Justin Sun and his patsies are like wasps that came to eat up the hard work of all the bees. The bees moved to a new hive, and now the wasps over at the old beehive are stinging each other and trying to eat up all the honey. Silly analogy, but it fits.
Also, what you're talking about finance and reputation being tied together is what some call a social credit score.
In an economy that is based a great deal more on social, digital activity, that is exactly what it is.
Of course, in the financial world it already exists. There individual credit scores, business rating, and an assortment of other metrics used to judge the "worthiness" of an individual or entity.
Posted Using LeoFinance
Congratulations @taskmaster4450! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your board And compare to others on the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPSupport the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!
It is hard for me to get the point of the video. STEEM was created through a Corporation called Steemit Inc.. Instead of pre-IPO stocks like Zuck had with Facebook Steemit Inc. created a fuck of a bunch of ninja tokens. Later that Corporation was sold to Mr. Sun for something like $10 million fucking dollars. Now you think he can't do whatever the fuck he wants to do with that stake? That logic is delusional in my opinion.
If Zuck or his alphabet agency overlords don't like your content they simply delete it to fucking @null. If Google or their alphabet agency overlords don't like your YouTube content they delete it to fucking @null or steal your income through demonitization. That's what corporation do!!!
HIVE still has that corporate stank all over it. It is the same old STEEM without STINC but bet your sweet arse that another Cabal is in control. If they really wanted to shake the corporate stank they should have started a fresh chain with no ninja pre-mined or their (BS narrative named) airdropped tokens. But that would have meant that the V.22.2 Cabal would have lost control which the HIVE/STEEM fork was really all about!.
Summary:
In this video, the speaker discusses a recent soft fork on STEAM in response to a hard fork that froze the account of community 321. Bittrex is holding almost 24 million STEAM from community 321 and is likely to send the funds back. The speaker raises questions about property ownership, thievery, and potential legal and criminal liabilities in this situation. They highlight the need for a digital ID system tied to a reputation system to hold individuals accountable. The discussion extends to developments in the crypto community, focusing on issues of centralization, power dynamics, and the importance of preserving trust in blockchain projects.
Detailed Article:
The video begins with the speaker addressing the recent soft fork on STEAM as a response to a hard fork that resulted in the freezing of the account of community 321. They explain that the funds sent to Bittrex from community 321 are currently frozen, raising concerns about the fate of these funds. There is a mention of the control over community 321 being under an unnamed source and the potential return of funds by Bittrex to this community.
The focus then shifts to the legal and ethical implications of the situation, with questions raised about property ownership, thievery, and the potential for civil and criminal penalties. The speaker contemplates whether the actions taken could amount to criminal prosecution, highlighting the complexities of cybercrime within the crypto space.
Furthermore, the speaker emphasizes the need for a digital ID system linked to a reputation system to hold individuals like Justin Sun accountable for their actions. The discussion extends to the broader implications for the crypto community, stressing the importance of trust, decentralization, and the potential risks of centralized control in blockchain projects.
The speaker warns about the consequences of centralized power dynamics within blockchain projects, particularly in light of recent events involving Justin Sun and the issues on STEAM. They caution investors and developers to consider the risks associated with centralized control and potential misuse of power within blockchain platforms. The speaker draws parallels with centralized platforms like Facebook and YouTube and highlights the importance of avoiding similar pitfalls in the crypto world.
I agree completely. We need to really study the governance model and make changes with the goal of preventing something like that from taking place.
Is the answer more consensus witnesses? Less votes per account? A combination of both?
Whatever it is, we need to start discussing it.
Posted Using LeoFinance