Most Blockchain Development is Utterly Wasted on Reinventing the Old… We Need New Ideas
The New vs. The Old
The power of blockchain is not to reinvent the products that currently dominate the market. Whenever a company claims it will be “The Next [Whatever]”, it’s a sign of ignorance.
Blockchain is fundamentally a NEW technology. It is important to understand this, because humans have historically been terrible at predicting the trajectory of new ideas. We always want to map them to the past. We look at what already existed and figure we can do it a little better.
It would be a shame for Steemit to replace Facebook… because that is an incremental improvement. It’s not a realization of the real potential of blockchain. Facebook is the ultimate centralized network… and a decentralized network makes a huge mistake by copying it.
That’s where DTube fails. For one thing, IFPS might be a hugely overvalued, and underperforming, project… LBRY is doing the same thing with less than 1% as much money. When you raise $500,000,000 and can’t reliably host a few thousand hours of video… you are blowing it.
What the Telephone Tells Us About Blockchain
When the telephone was invented, its creators imagined it would enhance the activity of the telegram. Telegram operators could use it to communicate with each other. There was no plan to put telephones in peoples’ homes.
Steemit is similar to reddit, but it won’t replace it. Ditto for Facebook, Twitter, and so on. Steemit is a new kind of network.
Reddit and Facebook are the epitome of centralized networks. They are fueled by memes and cheap entertainment. Steemit has no place for any of the content that you see on the front page of Reddit - if a user earned a spot on the top of the trending page for a meme, they would be largely lambasted.
It’s a different system with different opportunities.
Centralized networks are not evil. They are one useful paradigm. Rather than focus on destroying the structures that exist now, we should be adding to them. When we add something new to the ecosystem, we can create exponential progress rather than incremental progress.
Determinate vs. Indeterminate Optimism
Indeterminate Optimism: The idea that things will get better, but we don’t know how.
This is an unsustainable mindset. As Peter Thiel points out in the above video, it is how we look at death - “Well, I probably won’t die this year. That’s good enough.” - but it does not lead to radical improvement, it only leads to survival.
When you believe that the future will be good and don’t know why, it is natural to copy the current success stories. After all, it worked for them, and why not for you?
Determinate Optimism is when you have a clear vision of why the future shall be better. With blockchain, we have the power to create decentralized networks that value legitimate contribution and collaboration.
Uncensored networks are inherently more collaborative, more creative, than censored ones. There are problems around the edges - hate speech, ignorance, etc - but the vast majority of the creation is positive and pragmatic.
When we attempt to recreate centralized networks… we toss away the potential of blockchain. Instead, let’s focus on a clear vision of a radically better future: A more voluntary, more collaborative, more creative and equal future.
Let the current centralized systems stand. If they are not creating real value, they will fall when their time comes.
Will you join me to create a new kind of world?
We can use analogies with other services to explain what steemit is, but it is still something radically different. People struggle to comprehend that
comprehension is one thing, acting as if it is unique is another. Most people come in here with their various platform habits and treat it as if Steemit is the same. For it to be radically different, people must use it in a radically different way.
You both are making good points here. The analogy is useful, but its use is limited... I do wonder how minnows and dolphins on this platform can do a better job of using Steemit in a "radically different way" such that we will move faster towards finding our own place in the social media ecosystem.
Perhaps it's already happening at a good pace, and patience is the answer. I am not sure.
This reminds me of what Henry Ford allegedly said: "If I asked people what they wanted, they would say faster horses ."
people often wants the impossible ... but periodically somebody solves the problem at root :-) ... Ford one of "them"
Well, for the time-being anyway! ;-)
Yeah this quote sums up everything I am trying to say, but in 1% of the words, haha. You can draw a similar parallel to the innovations of Steve Jobs and (separately) Satoshi, in both cases we had no idea that such amazing new things were possible.
Steemit actually is not a social network but a blogging platform, so it will not replace Facebook - it's a different kind of software with different functions.
Centralized ? Decentralized ? Good or Bad ?
Actually how can you access steemit software ? Using steemit.com
What do you use for it? A browser. How do you access Facebook ? ...
It's not a game of words, steemit and facebook from a user point of view are centralized systems... the technology used , blockchain, is decentralized but it's a quality related to the power and construction "material".
Steemit can change, it can evolve, and as web software designer and developer I can tell you that estetically Steemit could look like facebook ... So I think it could replace Facebook
(P.s. if you are interested in a SteemIT version that have same functionality as facebook please follow my blog to support the cause)
You seem to be saying two different things... "Steemit [..] will not replace Facebook" and then "I think it could replace Facebook" - which is it?
It could it doesn't mean it will , and I specify a condition which probably is not obvious but I tell it with other words: as it is now will not replace Facebook (absurd btw) but if UI AND UX will evolve and provide real social network functionality ( messages, chat, pages, posts, reactions etc) it could mean even facebook death. Does it make sense now for you ?
This is a great post because it recognizes that it is disruptive technologies - like blockchain - that create new industries, opportunities, and societies. I knew I followed @haymattsokol for good reason! This post is but an example of why I did.
Just moments ago I posted this blog, that discusses how to replace our current notion of currency, debt, and finance altogether. I'd appreciate any criticism and points ya'll could make about how to effect this plan, or make it better, or why it will never work.
Thanks!
At first I was going to disagree, but after reading your arguments, I then thought about AOL. Google didn't KILL AOL, they just swept them under the rug...
GREAT example. Even now, Google co-exists with many of its competitors - it doesn't need to destroy them, it merely outperforms them.
I agree with you.
You are on point in my opinion when you said that Steemit will not be the "next Facebook", but It has a real chance to disrupt Facebook in a major way.
What do you mean when you say it has the chance to disrupt Facebook in a major way?
Look at it this way: People were writing letters to communicate until the telephone was invented. Then "slowly" people started to migrate from the telephone to internet services like skype, viber, messenger etc. Those services took away a part of the market share from phone service providers.
So every product/service seems to have a shell life. Facebook is no exception, although it's a way harder nut to crack. Still, there is a big possibility that Steemit will at least take market share from facebook (the social platform) or other social media platforms, if not completely disrupt them, like was the case for: letters/email, cart/car, candles(as light)/electricity etc.
Well, it's an evolution in the "attention economy" as the steemit people like to say. That leaves the form of the "market share" in a kind of protean state.
Facebook and cheap memes ......yup we want some quality and collaboration on here. Well written.
It takes time for people to adjust to the new. It is also natural to want to put Steem into a box with the other social media outlets out there because that is all people know. I am still getting used to the concept and learning my way around but I can see your point in the potential applications down the line. It seems to me that the best that we can do is offer what we know, put out knowledge and passions out there, connect with others of similar interest and then go from there. Our own personal networks will grow, ideas will pop off of each other and in time you and I will both see where the blockchain ends up. In the mean time, we can do our best to incorporate our own value into the system and lead as an example. Are there certain things that you would like to see done or wish to be implemented?
Hey, whether or not steemit replaces facebook or youtube doesn't matter. I love everything about steemit and have replaced them myself with steemit! I am happy to see dtube on here. Just makes it a one stop operation for me. I still check my facebook from time to time because my family and friends are all on there..Hopefully someday they will all be here.
Doesn't it matter, though? Setting out to "replace Facebook" is a very specific, and arguably insane, goal.
The point of this thread is that we should frame out task differently. The way I think about it now, is: "We must build the world's primary incentivized media platform"
blockchain for me is like home, the only place I'm truly welcomed. Nowhere else valued my contributions and every platform I tried handed me my earnings like they're doing me a favor.
Bitcoin included me in seconds while paypal sees everyone as a criminal.
Steemit welcomed me with open arms while Facebook tried to sell me exposure.
I made money out of my work here while every other platform cut percentages off me.
not to mention without paypal, my money wasn't good for anyone, nobody sold me their software. I never had that problem with crypto currency.
I beg to differ, blockchain is a good replacement, depends on your point of view though.