Final thoughts on #NewSteem, Blockchain Ethics, and Chasing off Investors.steemCreated with Sketch.

in #palnet5 years ago (edited)

Preface, this post was inspired by an epic debate I've been having with a fellow Steemian concerning blockchain ethics as it relates to the value of Steem. It was a grand debate equally full of snark as it was with respect. But now it's time to close that chapter, and these are my final thoughts on the topic.


I think the people who see the DPoS as an incentive are probably looking to make a quick buck, and the same goes for those who invested during the 2017 BTC surge. You might see these folks as profiteers, but I see these people as beings who are guided by their hardwired instinct to pursue self-interest. For good or ill, it's what causes our species to survive, i.e., when people act in their self-interest.

There are short and long term views of this. Some folks might be inclined to look out for "the good of the platform." Others, on the other hand, might be trying to eat today. I cannot parse the morality between these two things, and when I look at the language in the white and blue papers—I don't think they had intentions you would consider either right, moral, pure, true, or whatever metric it is that you're aspiring too.

That said, I guess it depends on what a person values more; The rights of the individual, vs. the rights of the group. The whitepaper is completely amoral about it. It really and truly doesn't give two fucks, that's my interpretation anyhow—it's just there, to ensnare would-be investors. It's nice when people lookout for the good of a group. I say this within the strict confines of charity and patronage as these are voluntary acts that are mutually beneficial to both parties, else they wouldn't do it.

When you take the existing system that we have, and suddenly force investors to share only and to stop profiting, you're sending a signal to the market. This signal says that this obscure and abstract blockchain community social network will only be kind to certain types of investors.

Funnily enough, Steem decided to do this when the investments are slim to nil. So yeah, the tribe (or witnesses) have spoken. It says we don't want any outside help to the value of the crypto, unless your a fucking generous ass person who is willing to work full time as a curator if you expect anything in return for your efforts, and even then, no promises, after all, it's a crypto market.

Even the dipshit tribes of the Vanuatu islands were smart enough to respect prince Phillip and his high technology that his ship brought to their islands. They went a little too far with that reverence, but that's another story entirely. Point is, they didn't look a gift horse in the mouth.

Right now, I'm seeing so many people on this blockchain who are straight-up trolling large stakeholders, people who innovated and filled the need for Steemians to gain exposure in a world where PoB is a god damn lie.

They did this because the market demanded it. The market created a vacuum for a service that shouldn't have needed to exist in the first place. But they did it, not just for the good of the market, but for themselves too. They created and provided a legitimate service and profited from it.

Now everyone thinks that #newsteem is the fix and part of that fix is pissing lots of people the fuck off, and that's the downvotes. It's souring bid bot operators and their customers too. And you can cheer and yell victory about these things, but the truth of the matter is there are not many active users or a whole lot of money invested in this platform.

Also, the perception of taking shit away from people will always look and feel like theft. It doesn't matter what weird and abstract otherworld definitions you give to it. They're creating a really weird atmosphere, and some people are using the free flags as an opportunity to act like tyrants, censors, and god damn communists.

But hey—let's see it through to its end. Let's see what happens. Let's see where the money goes to when it flees. Let's see who buys the dip with their chips even though it's a little bit more rancid now than it was before. At this point, I'm just in it for the lolz anyhow. We'll see what it do. (ツ)_/¯

Sincerely yours,
DumboSomaliPirateMinnowⓚ



The image above is brought to you courtesy of Pixabay.

Sort:  

The thing that is being overlooked here when you assert this

When you take the existing system we have, and suddenly force investors to share only, and to stop profiting, you're sending a signal to the market. This signal says that this obscure and abstract blockchain community social network will only be kind to certain types of investors.

is that most crypto investments rely solely on the valuation of the crypto itself going up. There is no passive growth for simply staking it, no growth from casting votes on others creation. No growth from creating and having others vote you a part of the pool. All of that is atop the same way most crypto investors gain.

There is also something to be said for ones wallet address being a name and not a long string of characters. Something to be said for not losing everything the second a hack occurs, unlike other projects. Something to be said for the potential SMT may bring to the table.

I don't know much about the Steem Engine tribes, but seems they could be used by anyone with the monetary means and desire to set up their own platform to allow whatever forms of freedom from echo chambers, downvotes etc that they would wish. If there were a demand for such a vision, there would by default be a demand for the tokens created on a side chain. But, it has not escaped my notice that for all the anger over censorship on the mainstream avenues, you never see the money ponied up to create platforms welcome to those censored authors. Perhaps the coming year will see that come to fruition, and could be an off shoot of this very chain that offers rewards to those participating.

Hope all has been well. Glad you are sticking around, even if just for the lolz.

All is well, thanks for sharing your thoughts &
insights into the matter @practicalthought!

...some people are using the free flags as an opportunity to act like tyrants, censors, and god damn communists.

Is anyone surprised by this?

The downvotes were always going to end up being a tool for control and dominance over the reward pool. I would argue that the witnesses knew that and HF20 was even designed for this purpose.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts
on this @buggedout! Now you're
officially a terrorist. This means,
you'll be forced to sleep in the
same cave as the rest of us.

I have profited from our discussion, far more in terms of understanding than financially. That's why I'm here, and why social media is so profitable overall. The benefits of most platforms aren't even potentially financial, yet we see that people flock to them. This demonstrates that non-financial values are far more important to society than financial interests.

Steem is broken because it focuses on financial interests to the exclusion of other, more valuable, societal features IMHO.

"When you take the existing system we have, and suddenly force investors to share only, and to stop profiting..."

Since when does enabling endeavors to generate capital gains prevent profit, or force investors to share? Preventing investors from taking the products fabricated in a factory off the line and selling them on the black market is not forcing them to share. It's allowing the proceeds of conducting business to inure to the investment vehicle, rather than stealing them from other investors.

This is why Bain Capital Partners is perennially in litigation for tort, and Berkshire Hathaway not only isn't, but is followed by speculators who invest in whatever Warren Buffet invests in, to profit from the rise in stock prices he inevitably creates.

Thanks!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.26
TRX 0.11
JST 0.030
BTC 68688.65
ETH 3764.71
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.51