You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Bid Bots: Steem's Achilles Heel? I present A New Way To Solve The Bid Bot Issues And Reinstate 'Proof Of Brain'.

in #steem6 years ago (edited)

"Why would it be a useful business? ONLY if you know your own posts aren't really so full of 'brain'. If you can't compete on a balanced playing field (paying field?) then what does that say about your content?"

Posts that get regular votes or even high value votes doesn't necessarily in all cases prove that proof of brain is involved. You've got to take into consideration wealth classes and reciprocity that people generally tend to engage in whether they do so consciously or unconsciously. It's natural at times to be "nice" to people who are "nice" to you. Call it circle jerking call it whatever, reciprocity is somewhat baked into the cake of human nature.

We also have various systems on the platform, voting trails and the like and trails that follow trails. Even I follow voting trails, right now I'm probably voting on someone's content that I haven't even read. In this case I manually upvoted you, yet had I not you would have received my vote regardless to a lesser degree.

Point being, just because a post gets votes that doesn't necessarily mean that proof of brain was used in the case of each and every vote. Also, to suggest that everyone who uses or has ever used a bidbot is doing so because they have low quality posts would be inaccurate. Many people use bidbots for the exact opposite reason.

In the case of @smartsteem you'll find a whole lot of folks who use their service for the purpose of boosting quality content. Obviously it's subjective, but if you boost a shit post you run a high risk of getting downvoted and or trolled in the comment section. The cool part about the responsible bidbot operators is that they blacklist shit posters.

Whether it be in the form of voting trails or bidbots -- the fact of the matter is that automation changed the very nature of the blockchain. The technology is a double-edged sword if you ask me. Some see the bid bots as a bad thing, I both agree and disagree with that statement depending upon the post that is boosted. Some see the curation trails as a good thing. I both agree and disagree with that statement depending upon the post that is boosted.

Also, steemians don't only use bots to hit the trending. People come to steem and they find their writing niche and many times they're using the bots to simply rank higher in specific tags which is far more easy to accomplish than it is to hit the trending page. All that aside, I think your idea makes for a good experiment, one that needs to be conducted and if there is a mass exodus and people choose that condenser over the first one then it's highly likely that STINC will respond accordingly, as good ideas and successful strategies are highly contagious.

If Dan can create a better model, I say more power to him. STINC can adapt or die. Competition is what creates greatness. Just imagine what the computer market would be if there were no competition. If Dan does do it better, I'm sure someone will create a condenser that emulates that better model. In this brave new world of all things technology and internet there is one key maxim that holds true. Adapt or die. Fakebook is going to die, they've commit suicide by engaging in censorship. They bled out some last quarter and they will continue to do so in the next one.

Sort:  

Posts that get regular votes or even high value votes doesn't necessarily in all cases prove that proof of brain is involved.

Yes, that's true.

Call it circle jerking call it whatever, reciprocity is somewhat baked into the cake of human nature.

Yes, there is nothing wrong with reciprocity.

just because a post gets votes that doesn't necessarily mean that proof of brain was used in the case of each and every vote.

Yes, so you are describing something like a 'proof of popularity' factor. Does popularity always equal brain? Absolutely not!

to suggest that everyone who uses or has ever used a bidbot is doing so because they have low quality posts would be inaccurate. Many people use bidbots for the exact opposite reason.

In my experience, people who use bidbots when their posts are some of their best (which I do sometimes), do so because they have no other way to gain exposure. The driving force behind that dynamic is that there are already so many other posts using bidbots. I am saying that I don't think this all got started by people with the best posts since they should have already been having success at reaching the top spots anyway. In actuality, I started experimenting with Booster very early on - mainly because I was actually making profit just from using it AND it was boosting my posts... So it would have been a bit dumb not to use it. However, I had no idea where things were headed then!

On balance, I would rather have an environment where I stand some chance of trending on merit alone, than one where I have a guaranteed chance of trending only by spending money.

I just get frustrated to see so many people behind an exciting system that helps so many people, yet so little intention to hold balance for new users and new 'brain'. The 'old' world is full of pyramid hierarchies and people trying to control those below them out of fear of losing their position. I would like to think that 'proof of brain' ultimately proves this to be a poor choice!

I feel ya man. Putting the genie back in the bottle (and I think that's what your trying to do) can prove challenging. It will only work on whichever condenser implements it. I'd like to see a whole lot more experimentation with the various portals.