Solid rebuttal to good points brought up by WU.
I'm not going to butt in or really get into this but did want to address something about the testnet that came up in a conversation I had last night with a witness. They shared my sentiments that while it may be open for everyone it really serves little purpose except to see if there are any bugs that will be potentiality detrimental once launched.
This is because there's no real practicality of testing a fantasy version of steem where as it says on the header "nothing you do here is real" Which is funny, and should be considered for our motto but that's a side salad. My point is it's like determining how a high stakes poker tournament will go based on the results of a freeroll.. While I realise its not possible to do a proper beta test or to take a sample of various accounts and allow them to really tinker with the new paradigm, it does put the focus on the reality that nobody knows what will happen until it's rolled out and put to use for enough time for everyone to acclimate and calibrate to the system changes.
If it's a catastrophe it can be rolled back or sideways or whatever seems better when and if it's time to cross that bridge.
This has been a test of the emergency broadcast system, remember this is only a test and the only way a blockchain can move forward is to throw some stones in the pool and see what the ripples do. We don't have the luxury of real tests that centralised tech companies spend millions on so let's just all relax on the speculation and let the cards be dealt. I'll see yuns at the craps table until then..
Posted using Partiko Android
This is exactly what the testnet is for. It isn't to simulate behavior of the user group, that has to be done in the wild because even with significant amounts of users in the testnet, it won't replicate the reality and there will be a selection bias as the worst behaviors won't be present.
The "no one knows" component is exciting, isnt it? :D
Yes exciting indeed, and that is what I was eluding to that the testnet doesn't have a purpose that "anyone" would care about to "test" it. And that this reality and the no one knows aspect makes the test trivial for the average user.
I am pretty sure I could be a consensus witness on the testnet 😂
Yep, I understood what you meant. I wouldn't know what I am testing for but hopefully this time they have hired a few pro testers also for the case.
I also mentioned last time setting up a solid system for witnesses in case something goes wrong and and an interface that would aggregate witness positions and thoughts on the HF... What are the chances? :D
That would be most useful. Chances of worthwhile proposals being implemented might have a 10% chance of happening post fork 😉
Posted using Partiko Android
As long as there are 100 proposals, 10 good ones is all it takes. If you look at a normal distribution - we want to have things on the positive in the second and third bands.... 3rd band is 1 idea in 1000? 4th band in a million or something like that. :D