Currently if you invest money into steem, you are simply handing your money over to whales for them to disperse as they see fit. Whales and even guilds can disperse payments but they never actually need to invest. This is what I mean by flawed financial cases. However the power of steems community cannot be denied, and if the merit system is overhauled then steem could go back to a $400 million marketcap overnight
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I see, yup that's a legit concern. I would call it a "lossy" system, since it's backed by a subjective proof of work. But then again, if you think about it - BTC isn't considered "lossy" because funds are dispersed only to miners, which in turn MUST also maintain the network in order to go on. So the MUST keyword there is important I think.. and ways to contribute to the network is actually way more indirect that anyone would expect.. call it a big Black Swan experiment if it ever gets that huge.
That's a very very very good point! Only difference is that Bitcoin's total coins is capped, so Capital appreciation is huge factor in investing. Actually the only factor. If steem had a fixed amount and raised funds via advertising or some other route then it would become a much more financially viable model. Infact I dare say that someone will fork the code and do just that sooner or later.
Accounting for unretrivable / mia accounts and all that, i think a small addition of new currency is okay.