Steem may encounter troubles rolling out SMT adoption as per the white paper if a business entity discovers that it’s audience can basically run the system. In specific, this is around the meta-economics game going on around what is being talked about at the moment. The flag war.
With regards to Haejin’s content, I swung by to check it out. It’s consistent, well formatted and the audience are really receptive to it with a lot of engagement. I don’t think it is my place to judge really in terms of worth. Crypto forecasting isn’t really my bag, but, on the flip, is listening to me sitter on about electronic bleeps and bloops anyone elses? More than likely not. It’s all in the eye of the beholder and someone with a huge amount of weight is finding value there.
As such, Steemit is working as designed. It’s hands off free market stuff. The main thing here is the distribution of power in the free market is like the real world status quo, heavily weighted. Either Steemit will carry on as is or they will come in with management controls. I have a feeling that they will err towards the former as the tech world tends to come from an egalitarian mindset (even if the concept is fundamentally flawed). I do not envy the ethical decisions they may have to make if control measures are introduced.
For the time being, I’m continuing being Mr Minnow. More than anything, I just like having a platform to carve out a corner with some content, and I’m getting that opportunity here and it’s been really rewarding - on social, monetary and creativity fronts. I’m continuing to monitor what is going on as I’ve a keen interest and investment in the platform. My main hope is that the big names in this can work it out between them without resorting to the flag penalties on both sides. It’s a shame when you see the leading figures of the site going at each other when there is such a current of positivity and hope in the main.
Wouldn't that be nice. But the self voting kind of ruins the analogy, plus the fact that we have a shared reward pool which gives everyone an interest in large, consistent, regular voting patterns (which suggest farm voting) especially when they are self votes.
Yeah, and it's probably not in the eye of the major investors right now. There is a lot of dumb money going into STEEM right now. Not because STEEM is dumb, because there's dumb money going into every single crypto in existence. If investors at large were to discover that people are regularly cashing out tens of thousands per day with nothing but spam BS, people would be stampeding to pull their money out.
Market forces are whats running it. Im guessing your being sarcastic.
Do you think so? I'm not so sure. I think those with a lot invested are actually incentivized to normalize that as they too tend to self reward and cash out from time to time.
I mean there are people who load tens of thousands on bittrex or binance and sort of indiscriminantly buy altcoins in the 20-50 list because they're low cap, and have the ability to really explode in value. Some of them really are crap coins, but the ones that are legit will explode and the gains make up for the loss of the bad coins. STEEM likely has a lot of investors that have never even created an account on the platform.
A lot of the money pouring into crypto is smart money - money that is going to take over those currencies.
Money that can then crash it anytime they want, and buy it back cheap, by causing panics.
Real money, in other words.
Right, I just mean there are a lot of people that are buying coins that they know absolutely nothing about. They'll see a comment on reddit or see how low the market cap is, see it pump and just buy it based on that. I would wager there is a not-insignificant amount of STEEM holders that aren't even aware of the social media aspect of it.
I don't think that dumb money is the bulk of investments in crypto. It's impossible to tell.
The inflation oncoming is a damn good reason to avoid dollars, and even dumb investments in other currencies are at least smart to get out of dollars.
In anarchy, nothing can be shared equally. Just like a pack of lions killing a weak gazelle, The dominant lion gets the most meat, the rest are left with scraps. Do away with the reward "POOL"- the term reeks of MLM Amway type shit. If you want your posts to be higher, spend some $ on buying some steem and use it to increase your posting power. The problem people arent understanding is- people are voting for haejin because he makes them money. LOTS of money. The "artists" think their post is undervalued- so they downvote everyone around them. COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. People come to steemit thinking "FREE PAYDAY" --- wrong. Come here and start giving, then you will get noticed and start recieving. Check my blog for some tax information on cryptos- no one has given me anything, but I such is life. I put it out there to HELP.
No system shares equally. We have to ask what it is we're sharing and whether or not sharing equally is even the goal.
Steemit does not in any way attempt to share equally. What is being shared out is a crypto asset which is created out of thin air, but which has utility in the system (gives you more voting power if powered up), which some people are willing to treat as money (in exchange for goods and services) and exchange for other assets.
Because it's created out of nothing, comparisons to what other national governments (even imagined ones) systems do is confused.
Sure, I agree. But that's not related to the problem. The problem here is that if you piss off some nasty rich people you can find yourself voted against in retaliation. This is obviously unfair.
So what's the solution to that? Keep your mouth shut? Just roll with it? Give up and leave?
BUY STEEM. THE SERVERS DONT RUN ON FAIRY DUST PEOPLE!! Steemit isnt run out of someones mothers basement. Its a business that operates without advertising. Who pays for the serveres, electricity, climate control, technical support? Elves? fairys? The Great Pumpkin from Charlie Brown? Somebody clue me in, Im all ears.
Its called the MUTE button.
Muting someone and burying your head in the sand doesn't negate a flag.
It gets rid of people you dont want to associate with. Much like blocking telemarkets. See it in action.
Oh I agree. It effects everybody, and I personally think there’s got to be some sort of management in there. You can’t just let market forces run things alone.
Especially when you end up with a bunch of self-appointed hall monitors who bought their way to the "top" of the power structure.
Each one, telling you the self interest their working on is for the greater community good..
Haven't we had enough of that across governments?
Sure. Now lets see you pay for the bandwidth, servers, electricity and technical support and other costs neccesary to keep this site up. Remember BITPETITE?
So much for "distributed".
And the witnesses aren't exactly in it to lose money... Lol. They're making plenty.
FTFY
Quoting someone incorrectly ... That's a-paddlin'. I'm going to have a word with the hall monitors.
Promises, promises... =p
I've been a baaaaaaad boy. Make me hurt real good!
XD
It's quite impossible to break the rules as far as I know, so you are correct. This is because at the basic level code is law.
However that does not mean we have to accept what happens, and to facilitate that disagreement we have our words and our flags.
This however may not be working and the code as law may need to be changed. Time will tell.
#decentralized
Or the business finds that only a few in its costomer base own enough of the companies stocks to run the show the way they see fit..and the stock holders are blinded by greed and run the company into the ground for short term profits....
Lack of faith in the people running the biz will do that.
Yeah, the only way SMTs will work is if they disallow whales.
Let me go one step further: The only way Steemit will work is if they disallow whales.
Oh...
P.S. This isn't just a "free market," this is the dystopian look at free market. This is why most free markets need some moderation to actually work.
Or we need to organize to combat this behavior anarchically instead of appealing to authorities. I think communication is a major part, and fighting censorship on the platform from bad actors/abusers. It is really a case study in anarchic conflict management, how do we police our open commons from abuses, while following the ethics of anarchism?
The problem is, the only communication that helps is communicating with whales that listen to try to stop this. I could gather together 10,000 people like myself and convince them all to give up all profit they can make and spend their lives flagging abusers all day (I couldn't actually even get close to doing this do this) and our collective downvotes could knock $100 off the rewards on one of haejins four posts. Even then, he's just the beginning. At least he isn't actual spam like most of what the bid bots upvote. Conflict management doesn't work very well when there are power differentials that are in severe excess of what you're likely to ever encounter in the real world.
You are right, this is a laboratory for what is going on Inc the wider world of fiat money. Very interesting game: how to keep people with power from being assholes!
The only way to become a person with power is to be an ASSHOLE. Nice, ethical people always lose. Read machaveli work.
I'd like to point out that the inverse of your example is also true. @haejin's rewards don't matter to minnows. Media payout is $.02, and @haejin is taking, at worst, 5% of the rewards pool.
He's impacting $.02 by 5%.
5% of nothing is.. carry the zero... ummm.... nothing. Still nothing.
It doesn't matter one bit to minnows which whales are taking 99% of the rewards.
No matter what, 50k minnows share 1% of rewards.
I think the problem is that the market is already centralized, and on this platform, market-power is almost the entirety of power.
There are no rules or ethics in ANARCHY. Thats why its called ANARCHY. lol.
I disagree. Anarchy can only exist with ethics and voluntarily agreed upon codes of conduct. Otherwise, anarchy dissolved into despotism, which requires additional revolutions to undo.
The definition of ANARCHY is having no rules. Once you have rules, its no longer ANARCHY.
That's not true, no rules mean chaos. If you research anarchy it is basically a small governing body where everyone has a right to vote. I read, and I can't remember who wrote this, true democracy is anarchy. We can have an equal vote on what rules to follow and apply this to our community.
Right. now huge investors have a large vote compared to others here on steemit. That is not anarchy, it's a Plutocracy. That's taken from what I've studied a little bit, I am not an expert on these issues.
Has it ever occured to you people that this site MIGHT just be an elaborate social experement on human behaviour in a non advertising platform? Contemplate this.
Thank you! Yes and Inc so curious how anarchy can solve from Plutarchy dilemma!
anarchy means no rulers. not no rules.
Just stating this again does not make it true.
Without rulers- who enforces the rules? why have rules, if you beleieve so much in anarchy?
Dont worry, dandelion, the effects from the mushrooms will wear off in a few hours, and you might be able to understand who pays for the servers and bandwidth and other costs of keeping a web platform like this operating. Its not trolls, fairies or magical unicorns. ITS WHALES.
Let's do a little thought experiment!
Whales invest in Steemit for profits. We can see from BTC in the last 6 months that the best way to profit from investment is capital gains. If you'd bought BTC in May at $1k, and sold at $20k, you'd have made 20 times your money.
Whales on Steemit aren't getting that from mining the rewards pool, but they are managing to keep retention down to ~10%.
Steemit is how the market for Steem is grown, it's special use case. By doing things that will retain users on Steemit, the market for Steem will grow, and upwards price pressure will apply to Steem.
Capital gains for investors will be the result.
However, driving 90% of users off the platform YOY will cause the price to stagnate, and eventually go to zero.
Then investors will have all the Steem, and it will be worthless.
This matters.
@haejin doesn't.
Hahaha and whales can be trolls or faeries, benefactors or abusers. It’s up to them, and everyone else, to discover way too move thru this territory.
Without steemit's content creators there would be no steemit....so let the big investors pay for the overhead when no one wants to use it anymore.
vis-a vie
Even if you could get every minnow on the platform, even the weakest whale would be beyond their ability to reign in.
Valued customer- you make to much sense for these people. Its a shame they dont understand this.
That would be wonderfull! Finally hardwork would pay off and not power of money!
I say we introduce Pirannahs, to eat the whales. Then everyone is well fed. ANARCHY IN ACTION. When you have 39 whales deciding who gets what and over 400,000 people on steemit- DUH- the game is rigged. You have to be rich and buy millions of Steem to be a whale, OR- be a sneaky creepy person and take a picture of a beautiful woman and post it on your profile and show your cleaveage to get upvotes. Think about this. I always look at other peoples wallets, also. And I have noticed some people follow me and repost articles and make more than I do. Thats life.
There are not 400k people on Steemit. Of all the accounts opened in 2016, ~11% remained active as of Nov. 2017. Around 500k accounts have been opened, and around 50k accounts remain active - including bots, and multiples.
Still, 39 whales is absolutely correct, and since they own all the Steem, they completely control the platform. They are the market which Stinc serves.
The rest of us are price supports.
Вы не учитывали golos.io - российскую вилку steemit. Точная та же платформа. You have not counted the users of golos.io- the russian fork of steemit. exact same page- mirror of steemit.
I confess I do not have the ability to reckon with Golos.
Is what you said, and what my answer responded to.
Its my opinion that this is an elaborate social experiment being conducted by the worlds Intelligence gathering agencies. Golos.io is an EXACT mirror of steemit.
Golos is an exact mirror of Steemit, with it's own users, and it's own rewards pool, all of which are completely separate from Steemit.
Steemit has somewhere between 20k and 50k actual users, presently, as far as I can tell.
It's practically impossible to separate actual people from bots, or multiple accounts.
I've not gone over the whitepaper recently but I have a feeling the business entity can choose weather to have STEEM as a usable token alongside their own. And if it is chosen, their are still variables that can be set. e.g - a STEEM down-vote can't negate value from an up-vote from ABC token.
Good man. 'We' have little part to play in this game when the main players now have Wallets in excess of Ten million dollars.
I’m just wondering if someone could wade onto a platform, buy a load of ABC tokens and start dictating things. You get a lot of people putting Bitcoin paywalls on tokens, so there are plenty who have the capability. Then again, I’m missing some gaps in how SMT works and there is a bit of a gulf in reading a white paper and translating that to the real world!
Regarding using Steemit - I mean I just like using it in its idyllic conceptual state. Which is nice! I can’t really impact this big meta thing that is going on anyway, it’s like busting into a boardroom when I’m some guy who just does the post.
I don't think so. Sorry I cannot give you the perfect answer as to why, but I think (as with Steemit), a particular account would be holding a majority stake. Does this impact decentralized ownership? Perhaps.
One or two folks perhaps didn't get the memo here, nicely put!
BRAV-O!
well done
very good idea
my dear friend
thank you so much