Why you're bitching, I'm gonna give stuff away.
https://steemit.com/giveaway/@generalizethis/free-monero
Topic: Someone please make a steem clone - page 11. (Read 14356 times)
Facebook became successful because of the original scamsters, goldmansachs and their bs ipo. That is what pushed facebook into the front.
Around the same time non technical idiots, the soccer moms of the world (who send those god awful chain letters) and even some grandmas figured put you could post pics, like your childrens pics, monitor your family. Etc.
Facebook became uncool instantly but the use case skyrocketed cause every lame untechnical idiot could start voicing their opinion.
But try to explain steem.it to these folks.
So you get paid to post shit. Ok. Everyone likes money.
But wait, mostly only tits get paid, never mind that, you get paid for doing jack shit.
But I want to cash out my new money, what the fuck is steem power and why is half my pay in that? Now everyone keeps telling me to power up some of my funds and powerdown others. What the fuck? i can only learn so much at once and pokemon go is really all I want to do.
Tldr, steem is fucking to confusing of a skeme to use
Around the same time non technical idiots, the soccer moms of the world (who send those god awful chain letters) and even some grandmas figured put you could post pics, like your childrens pics, monitor your family. Etc.
Facebook became uncool instantly but the use case skyrocketed cause every lame untechnical idiot could start voicing their opinion.
But try to explain steem.it to these folks.
So you get paid to post shit. Ok. Everyone likes money.
But wait, mostly only tits get paid, never mind that, you get paid for doing jack shit.
But I want to cash out my new money, what the fuck is steem power and why is half my pay in that? Now everyone keeps telling me to power up some of my funds and powerdown others. What the fuck? i can only learn so much at once and pokemon go is really all I want to do.
Tldr, steem is fucking to confusing of a skeme to use
I hate clones, so I never thought I'd say this: Please make a Steem clone
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
I don't think most people really care about Steem much.
That might be a myopic mistake, especially if you mean the concept itself, not Steem's flaws such as the 90% "pre"-mine and the entire lack of a medium-term investment option.
If the concept is designed and implemented correctly, I am speculating it would potentially be headed to double-digits $billion market cap at least.
Has the potential to popularize crypto-currency.
Thanks for sharing your opinion; and I am interested to read if you still think that most people should ignore the Steem concept and why?
Steem.it to me seems to be one big clusterfuck. Bottom line, its confusing as all hell. Power up, power down, different steam tokens, inflation, funds locked in, really really stupid posts make money. Why the fuck would anyone buy that shit? Hey look i'm experiencing the world, pay me.. What is steem doing for the world that fixes a need?
A browse through the site makes me feel like I wasted time that I'll never get back. And the worst thing, people keep advertising the tits. Where are they at? The boobs that people upvoted. Why is there no boob section?
Lame.
Something important Steem might attempt to do, or perhaps a clone could do:
https://steemit.com/blockchain/@anonymint/improving-web-browser-security-with-a-steem-like-blockchain
https://steemit.com/blockchain/@anonymint/improving-web-browser-security-with-a-steem-like-blockchain
I hate clones, so I never thought I'd say this: Please make a Steem clone
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
I don't think most people really care about Steem much.
saying that is like "people dont care about reddit" or "people dont care about bitcointalk". IMO Social medias are always relevant, they hold "great powers" in our world, and by power i mean money and information.
I hate clones, so I never thought I'd say this: Please make a Steem clone
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
I don't think most people really care about Steem much.
That might be a myopic mistake, especially if you mean the concept itself, not Steem's flaws such as the 90% "pre"-mine and the entire lack of a medium-term investment option.
If the concept is designed and implemented correctly, I am speculating it would potentially be headed to double-digits $billion market cap at least.
Has the potential to popularize crypto-currency.
Thanks for sharing your opinion; and I am interested to read if you still think that most people should ignore the Steem concept and why?
I hate clones, so I never thought I'd say this: Please make a Steem clone
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
Despite it's obvious flaws, Steem has shown us how we can get Joe and Jane into crypto. Steem will fail of course for reasons discussed in other threads, but a clone that fixes the issues could become a huge success. I would certainly throw a few btc at it if it had a dev with good reputation.
I don't think most people really care about Steem much.
Steemians are realizing I was correct:
The meaning of downvote has to change to "I don't want to read content and ensuring discussion like this". It needs to be a personal relevance tool, not a globalized ranking. I am working on this change.
There's a great short story in James Joyce's Dubliners in which a man outlines his life in comparison to an old acquaintance he's recently met again. The man looks at his life: his family and work and enviously compares it to his acquaintance's writing success. The irony is that if the man had laid out his life honestly (as Joyce did in the story) he would have had a literary success--at least with that story (@highlite, I hope saw that effect of with result of his post).
I'm sure the voting system can be tweaked for better outcomes for the site and user, I don't think it will be a one-size-fits-all solution--unless it allows for a more user defined experience.
The joy of re-entering the career of coding and rediscovering the kafkaesque wonders of (standards) committees¹:
https://github.com/whatwg/console/issues/63
https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/issues/13#issuecomment-222989505
https://github.com/whatwg/console/issues/63
https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/issues/13#issuecomment-222989505
| ¹ | Quote from: https://steemit.com/dao/@charleshosk/hoskus-parvum-opus-a-brief-sojourn-back-to-ethereum
Here is the proposed definition (and instruction to voters) of the meaning of an upvote and downvote for the project Webrary (intended to be an improvement over Steem) I am now developing. I want to vet this with y'all, since I am designing the internal algorithms around these. Note Webrary won't be the final name, but I can't mention the final one since don't own the .com domain yet. Like Steem/Steemit there will be separate names for the blockchain/UI respectively. The former name is similar to Webrary, and the latter one is more catchy and has more mass appeal than Steemit. Voting is the way you control the rankings of the future content you will see. An upvote or downvote is not a weapon to express agreement nor disagreement, nor to judge the value of the content to the overall project. Rather it should reflect whether you personally want to continue to be exposed to content (and the community it engenders) similar to the content you are voting on. An upvote or downvote will not cause the ranking of the content to change for voters who disagree with your content preferences. If you vote for political objectives intending to suppress or enhance visibility of the content for others and not for your preferences, then the type of content visible to you will become a groupthink monotone that fools you into believing everyone agrees with you, while others who disagree with you will continue to see the diversity of content that interests them. Indecision on your part should be reflected in a non-vote. Unlike Steem, voting remains open indefinitely and there is no curation penalty for voting later, so you may vote later once you've made up your mind. Steemians are realizing I was correct: The meaning of downvote has to change to "I don't want to read content and ensuring discussion like this". It needs to be a personal relevance tool, not a globalized ranking. I am working on this change. I am thinking that Steem/Steemit made a mistake to do their client-server data transfer via WebSockets instead of REST. They appear to have designed for a real-time update scenario, but this will come at the cost scalability (because WebSockets can't be cached upstream), and afaics the real-time updates are entirely unnecessary for the feature set of this type of site. This isn't chat and blog commenting shouldn't be used a real-time interactive chat. I don't think Steem could scale technically to a million users as it currently is designed. Certainly not 100 million users. That doesn't mean they couldn't do some redesign along the way, but the existing paradigm is gaining inertia that will be difficult to turn quickly, e.g. the new Steemit phone app. And the design choice they made is baked into many design decisions, such as that comments and blog posts are editable many hours after posting. Yes I agree. If they want a Reddit type of system then the simpler the better. The Steemit development team could be thinking that engaging the users more is the better path. But I agree with you, doing it forum style will be better. Even BCT is not running out of users.  It depends on how the person runs the site.I got more into the design and realized I don't need to forsake edits, rather just forsaking pushed updates (the server pushing to the client). Pushed interaction might be necessary for other future features, but afaics it isn't necessary for the blog content feature. I am thinking that Steem/Steemit made a mistake to do their client-server data transfer via WebSockets instead of REST. They appear to have designed for a real-time update scenario, but this will come at the cost scalability (because WebSockets can't be cached upstream), and afaics the real-time updates are entirely unnecessary for the feature set of this type of site. This isn't chat and blog commenting shouldn't be used a real-time interactive chat. I don't think Steem could scale technically to a million users as it currently is designed. Certainly not 100 million users. That doesn't mean they couldn't do some redesign along the way, but the existing paradigm is gaining inertia that will be difficult to turn quickly, e.g. the new Steemit phone app. And the design choice they made is baked into many design decisions, such as that comments and blog posts are editable many hours after posting. Yes I agree. If they want a Reddit type of system then the simpler the better. The Steemit development team could be thinking that engaging the users more is the better path. But I agree with you, doing it forum style will be better. Even BCT is not running out of users. It depends on how the person runs the site.
My thoughts about the major vulnerabilities of Steem:
Smooth much better if you don't cash any out and buy more STEEM POWER. Why not put your $ where your confidence is? I'll consider it Anyway, I never claimed Steem is perfect nor that it will clearly succeed, but it does have a big first mover advantage, isn't terrible, has decent size user base for a crypto (even factoring in the large number of scammer accounts) and is still growing. Thus, I don't think it is certainly doomed. Uncertainty prevails. The big uncertainty is whether they will remove the quadratic vote weighting and remove the whales' voting power. If they don't do that, they are dead. And if they remove the quadratic voting, they shift their target demographics significantly so there is a lot of risk in that change/transition. Even if they do that, they are still vulnerable to competition, primarily because Bitcoin investors will prefer one that wasn't so egregiously "pre"-mined and also one where the blockchain is not prevented by license from being forked. And also it seems there is no way it can be defended against a competitor which removes the stupid 50% yearly (currently 150%!) debasement of medium-term investors. Which I have a design that can do that. In short, they probably can't make such big changes. Those are the big picture reasons, that you apparently do not see clearly yet, but I do. Also there are other issues that I have been mentioning such as better relevance and scaling design. Moreover, why don't you buy any? As far as I know, you've never bought any significant amount of STEEM POWER. It was all "gifted" to you (okay some effort to research and mine it, also to build your reputation which made you a good asset for them to coddle). All of us have our confirmation biases. Yours is that you didn't risk anything consumerate to obtain your stake and mine is obvious that I want to think I can compete.
I am thinking that Steem/Steemit made a mistake to do their client-server data transfer via WebSockets instead of REST.
They appear to have designed for a real-time update scenario, but this will come at the cost scalability (because WebSockets can't be cached upstream), and afaics the real-time updates are entirely unnecessary for the feature set of this type of site. This isn't chat and blog commenting shouldn't be used a real-time interactive chat. I don't think Steem could scale technically to a million users as it currently is designed. Certainly not 100 million users. That doesn't mean they couldn't do some redesign along the way, but the existing paradigm is gaining inertia that will be difficult to turn quickly, e.g. the new Steemit phone app. And the design choice they made is baked into many design decisions, such as that comments and blog posts are editable many hours after posting. the problem with clones was that most of the times clones was ready to scam , now days some original coins scaming instantly and you have nothing to wait from a clone , well expect some hype! http://www.resistors-and-diodes-and-picchips-oh-my.co.uk/?p=1210 I think the decentralization=scam argument failed when it hit mass market, so they only needed to package it to the tastes of the market, not the taste of standard purveyors--good enough trumps--inflated price--yet quality concerns remain. The product needs to be resilient, the interface simple, and costs minimal. Whoever does that, wins. *Was looking for the French pronunciation of ingénue and found : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingenu 38+20=130 That's efficiency. My guess is this network thrives with resistance to tampering and leveraging a world distribution of content at ever lowering costs, until a base forms and liquidity trickles in. That's it--if you're looking for word count and fancy euphemisms, then you missed the point of capitalism--efficiency equals time ....and everyone wants more. /end
the problem with clones was that most of the times clones was ready to scam , now days some original coins scaming instantly and you have nothing to wait from a clone , well expect some hype!
Here is the proposed definition (and instruction to voters) of the meaning of an upvote and downvote for the project Webrary (intended to be an improvement over Steem) I am now developing. I want to vet this with y'all, since I am designing the internal algorithms around these. Note Webrary won't be the final name, but I can't mention the final one since don't own the .com domain yet. Like Steem/Steemit there will be separate names for the blockchain/UI respectively. The former name is similar to Webrary, and the latter one is more catchy and has more mass appeal than Steemit. Voting is the way you control the rankings of the future content you will see. An upvote or downvote is not a weapon to express agreement nor disagreement, nor to judge the value of the content to the overall project. Rather it should reflect whether you personally want to continue to be exposed to content (and the community it engenders) similar to this example. An upvote or downvote will not cause the ranking of the content to change for voters who disagree with your content preferences. If you vote for political objectives intending to suppress or enhance visibility of the content for others and not for your preferences, then the type of content visible to you will become a groupthink monotone that fools you into believing everyone agrees with you, while others who disagree with you will continue to see the diversity of content that interests them. Indecision on your part should be reflected in a non-vote. Unlike Steem, voting remains open indefinitely and there is no curation penalty for voting later, so you can vote later once you've made up your mind. I like your thinking on upvotes (less trying to game the system and more inviting future content for ease of use).
Here is the proposed definition (and instruction to voters) of the meaning of an upvote and downvote for the project Webrary (intended to be an improvement over Steem) I am now developing. I want to vet this with y'all, since I am designing the internal algorithms around these. Note Webrary won't be the final name, but I can't mention the final one since don't own the .com domain yet. Like Steem/Steemit there will be separate names for the blockchain/UI respectively. The former name is similar to Webrary, and the latter one is more catchy and has more mass appeal than Steemit.
Voting is the way you control the rankings of the future content you will see. An upvote or downvote is not a weapon to express agreement nor disagreement, nor to judge the value of the content to the overall project. Rather it should reflect whether you personally want to continue to be exposed to content (and the community it engenders) similar to the content you are voting on. An upvote or downvote will not cause the ranking of the content to change for voters who disagree with your content preferences. If you vote for political objectives intending to suppress or enhance visibility of the content for others and not for your preferences, then the type of content visible to you will become a groupthink monotone that fools you into believing everyone agrees with you, while others who disagree with you will continue to see the diversity of content that interests them. Indecision on your part should be reflected in a non-vote. Unlike Steem, voting remains open indefinitely and there is no curation penalty for voting later, so you may vote later once you've made up your mind. I would prefer one based more on pictures and videos, like Instagram, instead of long winded justifications and rants. That's true , actually it's isnt about socializing , but making money but more serious Graphene chains have demonstrated that they can handle the speed and load A couple of 1000 users online simultaneously isn't a scaling test yet. Also afaik DDoS attacks have been directed at Steemit.com. Let's see what happens when they target the Steem blockchain network. Jump to:
|
