Topic: Steem pyramid scheme revealed - page 23. (Read 107059 times)
Also another major flaw of DPoS is that exchanges can vote but they don't have the same vested interest (and they can be hacked), so that sort of destroys the notion that the whales don't want to attack their own coin because there isn't enough liquidity to short their huge stake. Well Steemit, Inc solved that problem by controlling majority of the stake, but for a real-world outcome DPoS can't suffice for that reason IMO.
I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of other whales dump though.
I think the issue right now is that the whales are dumping 1/104 of their steempower every week, but making just as much from inflation rises to steempower plus curation. So it's a pepetual dumping machine.
Under the new system, if they dump, that's it, their stash is much lower. So they can only dump once. When the dumping is out of the way, the coin should rise because selling pressure has abated.
I think the issue now is more of trust than anything people have been burnt by the crash in price, I know alot of people are now using the platform now which is good and the number of users have increased significantly but will it worth the effort soon
I think some people will undoubtedly use the opportunity to cash out and invest in other coins. So a bumpy three month ride till they have gone from the system.
I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of other whales dump though.
I think the issue right now is that the whales are dumping 1/104 of their steempower every week, but making just as much from inflation rises to steempower plus curation. So it's a pepetual dumping machine.
Under the new system, if they dump, that's it, their stash is much lower. So they can only dump once. When the dumping is out of the way, the coin should rise because selling pressure has abated.
I think the issue now is more of trust than anything people have been burnt by the crash in price, I know alot of people are now using the platform now which is good and the number of users have increased significantly but will it worth the effort soon
I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of other whales dump though.
I think the issue right now is that the whales are dumping 1/104 of their steempower every week, but making just as much from inflation rises to steempower plus curation. So it's a pepetual dumping machine.
Under the new system, if they dump, that's it, their stash is much lower. So they can only dump once. When the dumping is out of the way, the coin should rise because selling pressure has abated.
Are the whales going to rape the system via exorbitant witness fees if they lose their ability to rake it in by gaming the voting model?
No.
(D)PoS isn't a free market on transaction fees. Somebody has to pay for the servers whether it is taken out of the collective as "witness fees" from dilution as is the case for Steem. The vested power-law distributed stake interests have a monopoly and can charge (more than the costs up to) the maximum the market can bear, which some allege is also underway in Bitcoin as proof-of-work mining is allegedly centralizing with economies-of-scale.
Is (D)PoS already more realistically resistant to insidious effects of centralization of vested interests "stake" than Satoshi's design?
No.
(D)PoS isn't a free market on transaction fees. Somebody has to pay for the servers whether it is taken out of the collective as "witness fees" from dilution as is the case for Steem. The vested power-law distributed stake interests have a monopoly and can charge (more than the costs up to) the maximum the market can bear, which some allege is also underway in Bitcoin as proof-of-work mining is allegedly centralizing with economies-of-scale.
I don't know or really care, but my assumption is that probably there is no need for funds for the next three months, so it would be "fair" imo if steemit didn't power down at this period too, so that everyone who wants to get out to do so without much "pressure".
I am not against them doing what ever they can to improve Steem. It is an interesting experiment to see if it is possible extract a project from an unnatural level of whale concentration due to a stealthy "premine". That was Dan's idea for an experiment on how to launch a token project.
I do my work. They do their work. Others do their work. It is all part of the greater ecosystem here.
I don't know why some people are surprised about the crash in Steem price, it was designed to fail with the distribution of their tokens, well conceived idea but the developers/ speculators greediness is biting back. Even the new set rules still have some weakness but could help if the market regain trust of the project but I doubt this because alot of people have been burnt already
Hopefully this isn't happening just so Dan and founders can withdraw their $millions quickly
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy#@ned/re-jrcornel-re-ats-david-re-steemitblog-proposed-changes-to-steem-economy-20161104t211733693z
Quote
[-]ned · 3 days ago
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
So after 3 months it's fair game?
I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of other whales dump though. I'm just gonna hold until Steem is out of its bear market, if ever... who knows, they could learn from their mistakes and things could get better. I wouldnt wanna sell at the bottom, my 1500 SP is already worthless as it is
If you don't like it you have 3 months to get out first. You can't ask for the rules to apply only to a few.
Hopefully this isn't happening just so Dan and founders can withdraw their $millions quickly
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy#@ned/re-jrcornel-re-ats-david-re-steemitblog-proposed-changes-to-steem-economy-20161104t211733693z
Quote
[-]ned · 3 days ago
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Yes I saw that too. What about the Steem, Inc. account which has something like 40% of the money supply?
I don't know or really care, but my assumption is that probably there is no need for funds for the next three months, so it would be "fair" imo if steemit didn't power down at this period too, so that everyone who wants to get out to do so without much "pressure".
Hopefully this isn't happening just so Dan and founders can withdraw their $millions quickly
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy#@ned/re-jrcornel-re-ats-david-re-steemitblog-proposed-changes-to-steem-economy-20161104t211733693z
Quote
[-]ned · 3 days ago
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
So after 3 months it's fair game?
I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of other whales dump though. I'm just gonna hold until Steem is out of its bear market, if ever... who knows, they could learn from their mistakes and things could get better. I wouldnt wanna sell at the bottom, my 1500 SP is already worthless as it is
By the way, I noticed this comment in the steemit thread:
Quote
I spent 400 BTC on SP a few month ago, it's worth about 20 BTC right now, i am the largest financial investor so far, the follow is what i think
Holy shit....
That's what the hell I said
But I don't know. I think SteemIt has a chance to pivot into better crypto-economics for mass adoption. I would not write it off this early. Its just too damn early and what they are attempting has never been done. Like IAMNOTBACK has alluded to I think there are other ways to do their model that may work better for mass adoption but I also think the configuration I am thinking of would only work in another industry. I talk about it a little with my introduction on that platform. I think there are other industries like Hollywood (mine) that could actually take advantage of their model for mass adoption and do a better job at
Although we don't need upvoting and whale culture as a pricing mechanism. We do need a better pricing unit that allows lower level visual content creators to extract value from a subscribing or viewing audience. I think if you were to start here and go upmarket this steem it scheme for mass adoption with a little twist could actually reap a lot of rewards. As an original Bitshares member and delegate I wish Dan and Ned luck. A few pivots and I think we could see a better Steem price next year. They are still in beta. Remember that.
Hopefully this isn't happening just so Dan and founders can withdraw their $millions quickly
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy#@ned/re-jrcornel-re-ats-david-re-steemitblog-proposed-changes-to-steem-economy-20161104t211733693z
Quote
[-]ned · 3 days ago
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
So after 3 months it's fair game?
I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of other whales dump though. I'm just gonna hold until Steem is out of its bear market, if ever... who knows, they could learn from their mistakes and things could get better. I wouldnt wanna sell at the bottom, my 1500 SP is already worthless as it is
By the way, I noticed this comment in the steemit thread:
Quote
I spent 400 BTC on SP a few month ago, it's worth about 20 BTC right now, i am the largest financial investor so far, the follow is what i think
Holy shit....
Hopefully this isn't happening just so Dan and founders can withdraw their $millions quickly
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy#@ned/re-jrcornel-re-ats-david-re-steemitblog-proposed-changes-to-steem-economy-20161104t211733693z
Quote
[-]ned · 3 days ago
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Yes I saw that too. What about the Steem, Inc. account which has something like 40% of the money supply?
Hopefully this isn't happening just so Dan and founders can withdraw their $millions quickly
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy#@ned/re-jrcornel-re-ats-david-re-steemitblog-proposed-changes-to-steem-economy-20161104t211733693z
Quote
[-]ned · 3 days ago
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
Dan & I will not be powering down during the three month period after this is implemented.
With the current STEEM price, is anyone even earning anything with it these days??? lol
To give you a perspective, my wallet was worth $3500 like 3 months ago and now it's $187 today even after the SP interest I earned lol.... I know the currency took a hit during this bear market but the founders didn't think though how ridiculous the inflation rate was.
I heard they are changing the rate of inflation and changing the power down / withdrawal time to 12 weeks instead of 104 weeks? If so, this is huge, and a much needed change.
Hopefully this isn't happening just so Dan and founders can withdraw their $millions quickly
I am against the paradigm where a whale votes with MY MONEY to give it to...
Maybe we should make your vote to weight the same as a whale then, would this make you happy?
What about MY MONEY and YOUR MONEY that bitcoin (and everything else) gives away without even asking anyone? We are not attacking bitcoin now, are we?
There is an important distinction between an objective (e.g. protocol driven) pooled reward and a subjective (e.g. power-law distribution controlled) pooled one. The latter enables politics, turf battles, collusion and malfeasance. Obviously rewards that are not pooled are not an issue (they are objective in the sense that each person is in control of their money).
This is why I have been stressing the importance of an objective pooled reward paradigm.
I am in favor an objective reward paradigm that incentivizes sticky exponential adoption of an ecosystem. And I will propose one (for my own design).
I am in favor of human diversity, creativity, and meritorious remuneration. I am not in favor backslapping politics cesspools.
Bitcoin rewards miners with minted coins objectively, i.e. there is human politics involved in the protocol's decision (although human politics are involved with for example which miners get 0% interest loans for purchasing hardware and subsidized electricity). Bitcoin's protocol is also flawed giving disproportionate rewards to the power-law economies-of-scale, but that is a technological weakness.
I am preparing to improve upon Bitcoin's flaws.
Epic typo. You should actually do a post on Steemit with that title "to work for pennis on steem"
That will be funny. You might get a lot of upvote and some donation for being a clown. They love that. Porn and clowns and some more porn or nude pics.
I am against the paradigm where a whale votes with MY MONEY to give it to...
Maybe we should make your vote to weight the same as a whale then, would this make you happy?
What about MY MONEY and YOUR MONEY that bitcoin (and everything else) gives away without even asking anyone? We are not attacking bitcoin now, are we?
Quote from: myself
I will be in Singapore in second and third week of January (for a medical trip to deal with my liver & digestive health problem)
...
I don't think it is in my best interests to apply my design and ideas to changing Steem, because I am not one of the whales who mined the stealth mining. The prior concentration of ownership disincentivizes me from being a full partner in the ecosystem. I had thought about contacting @ned, but then changed my mind when I became aware of how most of the tokens had been minded for Steemit, Inc.
...
I don't think it is in my best interests to apply my design and ideas to changing Steem, because I am not one of the whales who mined the stealth mining. The prior concentration of ownership disincentivizes me from being a full partner in the ecosystem. I had thought about contacting @ned, but then changed my mind when I became aware of how most of the tokens had been minded for Steemit, Inc.
I think that is my health issue which causing me to fail to put the word 'the' between 'in' and 'second', as well you can see I clearly misspelled 'minded' after spelling it correctly the first time, because I wrote 'changed my mind' in between. My brain is lacking fuel and/or is being attacked with toxins due to the liver and digestive dysfunction. I am nearly in a constant state of partial delirium.
You will see a totally accelerated rate of production from me if I can rid myself of this handicap. I am doing the best I can with this state of health and cognitive function.
I really pissed him off (see prior conversation quotes upthread for a link):
I never wrote nor implied that. I have already explained to you that I am not against your audience. I am against the paradigm where a whale votes with MY MONEY to give it to you, when I personally may not be interested in your coterie. I don't know why you are taking that economic fact as a personal insult. I thought you were a smart man.
I made the point to @berniesanders as a short quip and it turned into a firestorm of discussion. It is not as though I decided to invest that much effort, rather the lack of comprehension of you two dragged me into a long explanation.
I hope you noticed that 16 others flagged your post. Since flagging is something we all do with great restraint, you can factually determine that many people agree with my assessment (many more than the 16 who went to the extreme action of flagging ... they say for every complainer, there are 100 dissatisfied who did not speak out).
Quote from: myself
Quote from: @nonameslefttouse
You're basically telling everyone in the world who started at the bottom and wanted to work their way up... "don't bother."
I never wrote nor implied that. I have already explained to you that I am not against your audience. I am against the paradigm where a whale votes with MY MONEY to give it to you, when I personally may not be interested in your coterie. I don't know why you are taking that economic fact as a personal insult. I thought you were a smart man.
Quote from: @nonameslefttouse
Please go invest your time wisely. You've been an asshole here to me and everyone who voted. Go find a more productive hobby. If you truly did know what you were talking about, you'd be saying it to people who will listen. I'm only here to produce art, say a few things and make a bit of money. It's working, so get lost.
Why would you even waste your time saying all this stuff? Go write an article, get paid.
Why would you even waste your time saying all this stuff? Go write an article, get paid.
I made the point to @berniesanders as a short quip and it turned into a firestorm of discussion. It is not as though I decided to invest that much effort, rather the lack of comprehension of you two dragged me into a long explanation.
I hope you noticed that 16 others flagged your post. Since flagging is something we all do with great restraint, you can factually determine that many people agree with my assessment (many more than the 16 who went to the extreme action of flagging ... they say for every complainer, there are 100 dissatisfied who did not speak out).
So Steem is now contemplating a 3 month power down:
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy
And I am commenting:
You are correct that users won't stay just for money and the site must be enjoyable/meaningful even without remuneration, because it is mathematically impossible to pay users enough for blogging from debasement of investors.
However if users stayed because they are investors, then they could have both their heart and mind vested in it. That was one of my key insights when I realized how to make a better Steem "clone".
Voting is the problem (because as one of my blogs pointed out, it is impossible to avoid Sybil attacks without handing that voting power to the whales which thus centralizes the ranking and reward system).
Btw, remember I responded to one of your blogs in August and warned you that you were throwing your BTC down a rat hole. Maybe next time you listen more carefully to what I have to say.
Well you'll remember I was one of if not the first at Bitcointalk who was arguing that the speculators couldn't invest and afair you sort of downplayed it or disagreed. So now it is nice for me to see you trumpeting my points here as your own.
You want speculators to be able to get in and out. Yes. But you don't know the other part of my design which deviates from what you just wrote.
So Steem will drop the power down to 3 months, a huge cash out will occur potentially crashing the price further or enabling those who want out to get bought out at good prices by eager fools, whilst the drop from 2 years to 3 months destroys another critically important design point which I am not going to share publicly. But you have a hint in my other comment on this page.
https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/proposed-changes-to-steem-economy
And I am commenting:
Quote from: myself
Quote from: @laonie
If you want to win a user's heart, money just won't work.
You are correct that users won't stay just for money and the site must be enjoyable/meaningful even without remuneration, because it is mathematically impossible to pay users enough for blogging from debasement of investors.
However if users stayed because they are investors, then they could have both their heart and mind vested in it. That was one of my key insights when I realized how to make a better Steem "clone".
Voting is the problem (because as one of my blogs pointed out, it is impossible to avoid Sybil attacks without handing that voting power to the whales which thus centralizes the ranking and reward system).
Btw, remember I responded to one of your blogs in August and warned you that you were throwing your BTC down a rat hole. Maybe next time you listen more carefully to what I have to say.
Quote from: myself
Quote from: @smooth
We want people who want in to get in, and people who want out to get out. Adding (unnecessary) friction to either ultimately reduces the value of the platform.
Well you'll remember I was one of if not the first at Bitcointalk who was arguing that the speculators couldn't invest and afair you sort of downplayed it or disagreed. So now it is nice for me to see you trumpeting my points here as your own.
You want speculators to be able to get in and out. Yes. But you don't know the other part of my design which deviates from what you just wrote.
So Steem will drop the power down to 3 months, a huge cash out will occur potentially crashing the price further or enabling those who want out to get bought out at good prices by eager fools, whilst the drop from 2 years to 3 months destroys another critically important design point which I am not going to share publicly. But you have a hint in my other comment on this page.
Can you Steemit guys get it through your thick skulls that amateur blogging has zero value...
And until you KILL the Feudal Whale System no professional content provider or writer is gonna give you the time of day.
You could do it with a big logrithmic STEEM distribution to create a few hundred dolphins...
But it will never happen since they'd rather twiddle knobs... and Steemit can only be viewed as a fiasco at this point.
I think it's now obvious...
That most of what Dan Larimer knows about economics, securities, marketing (and theology) is wrong...
And I have no idea where C coders get the idea that they are multi-disciplinary experts.
I agree.
Quote from: myself
Quote from: @smooth
As someone else noted in the comments, many if not most speculators don't want to lock up their funds at all and three months is still too long. I don't really view the reduction in lock time as appealing to speculators, I view it as reducing the cost of entry for those who do intend to remain involved and invested indefinitely but aren't comfortable with a two year (one year average) exit lag.
I agree. And you are getting closer to my (somewhat secretive) point of the drop from 2 years to 3 months being contemplated is IMO the worst possible compromise. We'll see...
Jump to: