Random thoughts
View this post on Hive: Random thoughts
5 years ago in #steem by themarkymark (78)
$129.19
- Past Payouts $129.19, 0.00 TRX
- - Author $98.00, 0.00 TRX
- - Curators $31.20, 0.00 TRX
Well I upvoted this because I like it.
If earning less STEEM would lead to a higer STEEM price, I immediately would agree not to earn any single STEEM anymore ...
If supporting others and make them grow could extend the user base and thus make the whole blockchain more attractive for investors (who may only think it's worth to advertise and try to sell theirs products on a platform with a sufficient amount of active users), then I wouldn't actually call it altruistic doing so ...
The term.. give awards away is hysterical.
The stakeholders are entrusted with allocating the inflation to that which brings value. Not to use it as payment to themselves.
Would you mine (POW) a token that let those who mined the most previously get all the future mining.... :) Our DPOS is like a Democracy gone bad. Once the masses realize they can vote themselves a raise... it's all over but the crashing.
It is, but that's how people see it.
Oh I agree, it is viewed as their rewards.:) Not arguing just saying, that's so painfully frustrating and short sighted... Sigh.
!
there is no democratic element at all. This is the very point why Steem will die. It´s sad that people see self voting as proof of work. In two ways: first, this shows that they have no clue what POW means, second its the same shit murders do when they kill a child. They look for a reason why their action was justified.
Anyways, we will get our platform without "whales".
Wow...the more things change, the more they stay the same. I don't get the self-vote theory; mainly because the majority of Steemians don't have any value in their upvote. The last hardfork really put a dagger in the vote.
I enjoy Steemit because I simply have never been one to enjoy pointless social media. If technology doesn't serve as a business venture on some level, it's not worth my time/energy....jmho.
I've always felt Steemit had a plan up to a certain point; but, how to make it reproductive lacked fertility.
Lots of people made their millions...powered down...and well as I started...the more things change, the more they stay the same. That's not to include the continued dark start-ups that develop apps that pump and dump...
Peace.
7c steem? buying, but not based on games, smts, etc taking off. If they do cool, added bonus. Based on what we have, can have, right in front of us.
{reason to buy steem} i thought this would come from wanting to decide which authors blog made it to trending. Your voice / steem power to push them to the top, plus the fact that your making bank curating.
The problem with steem is that the incentives are not aligned. What I mean by this is that SP holders can allocate resources to themselves. Ideally SP holders should increase their holdings only if content creators do it at the same time. To get to that "ideal" situation we would need two things to happen:
I have thought about this alot and I can't find a way to solve it. There are always ways to circumvent whatever measures we come up with. For instance, if we are able to identify who owns each account to prevent self voting via alts then the parasitic actors can resort to backroom dealings to bypass the system (for those who were not around this type of behaviour created some drama in the early days of the platform).
The next best thing would be to penalize alt account usage with a non-linear rewards distribution curve coupled with the possibility to negate rewards to those who insist on leeching from the reward pool. In other words the EIP is the next best thing.
Unfortunately a non linear curve has some dowsides, mainly that the bigger the wallet the bigger your influence will be. That's way the shape of proposed curve is very important.
Another measure that could be taken is to reduce the portion of the inflation that goes to the reward pool but that would hamper the token distribution which is anoher goal that we should also focus on.
If interested, just check out this idea concerning the reward curve.
Actually I remember reading your post back then. If I am not mistaken the shape of a Sigmoid_function is similar to the one on the EIP.
Yes, and I am in favour of the convergent rewards curve.
500mv influence cap, n2 to encourage max account value, flags for abuse, and we can get back to where we were before stinc, et al, hijacked pob to give us powallet.
For someone with your political stance it strikes me as odd that you would be in favor of and n^2 curve which only encourages an oligarchy to entrench itself. Why would you want to go back to the old days? Back then if you invested 10k USD your vote was worth a whopping 0.001...pathetic.
Putting a cap on the stake doesn't help, it just creates a point of equilibrium where whales start to power down and does not encourage further investment.
while we are mentioning @whatsup "One thing I am sure of, if you have to pay yourself to take care of your own investment... It's not much of an investment, it's a scheme."
also you could look at it this way? how will life change for me if steem goes to 10$ and how will life change for someone with 500.000 - 1M steem? In whose interest is to make steem a good social network with people who want to be here?
Also the question is how did they get to the 1M steem?
You make a number of good points here, but ignored the easy answer. Why not ask the Steemit users who actually bought a significant amount of Steem to be here? Significant is a relative term of course, but spending 1,000 Euros to be on a platform when you can be on Youtube or Facebook without spending a dime is far from free loading. I'd further like to add that flagging original content to the degree it has been flagged will discourage current users from onboarding new members, why would we bring our friends here just to have their work shat on?
In case it hasn't dawned on anyone, it's not so much about the rewards as it is about a level playing field that gives you a fair chance of getting rewards.
Of my followers, most are dead accounts, and by that standard I'd have to conclude that the majority has spoken, like it or not. If I approach it strictly from an investor's point of view, things aren't looking much better. Why would a 100K steem holder earn at a higher percentage as a 2K holder? I could have just kept my BTC and made the same gains and losses as every other BTC investor, but here, the 100K investor can deny me an equal opportunity indefenatly.
Steemit is not asking anyone why they are leaving or why they are so pissed off, that means they'll never figure out how to fix the problem and leaves the impression they don't care.
Suppose I'll get another flag, oh well, those are the breaks. Have a good one.
Sincerely, Onno.
my mom cant even use a smart phone. most of my social contacts have no interest in a social network where they need to keep passwords safe, do extra work like blogging, commenting, curating, or creating process things. facebook and twitter gained popularity because interacting is quick and easy. Peeps are already so used to hearing about how politicians cheat and lie that FB selling their info doesnt phase them; so what?
why dont people get in to steemit? its too brain taxing, and unknown, therefore they dont trust it. "real life" keeps them so engaged in worrying about money and bills that they don't have time for things like investing, or how to effectively communicate to people outside their dunbar number circle. if issues don't affect them personally in the present time, most people be like, shrug... not saying this to be negative, just believe these are the hard realities.
crypto may be something we need to gear towards a younger generation, and it may take years of public outreach and education for people to understand how it might be used without "inconvenience". there's too much of a learning curve for little gain.
the way i see more involvement happening? provide people with something that they want that they aren't getting now. it used to be monetary incentive, but i think that's a bad draw, because it just pulls in the con artists and quick money grabbers. they tweak the system to find loopholes, grab and go.
what do kids pay for? gaming is a good draw, music, shared passions. many kids today are fed up with the government. good place to tap into. any kind of app that caters to their interests will draw them in. in other words, stop selling steem as an investment. I know that's counter intuitive. the draw has to be a good or service that they want to purchase. i know that this is maybe not what people want to hear. but its not your normal run of the mill person who comes to steemit and stays. find the common denominator. imho...
Only one answer for me - commerce, business. We need them to want advertise their products/services on steem and the income has to be distributed to content creators. You want to advertise on STEEM -> you buy STEEM token -> you make it valuable.