Topic: Steem pyramid scheme revealed - page 24. (Read 107069 times)

I am developing a social network blockchain project somewhat similar to Steem, but different in very important ways which address all of your points and even points you have not yet thought of. It is also intended to fix all the centralization problems of Bitcoin, so it is to be a major announcement in the Bitcoin ecosystem when I get close to launch. Also the name I have is superior (the domain is already registered), on the caliber of "Twitter".

The DPOS which Steem is based on is less than ideal. I wrote down the issues at least one of which afaik no one else had enumerated. I have also been creating  a new programming language to replace JavaScript and Java, and this ties into my plans for the social network. I must keep some of the details secret until I get closer to launch, otherwise other projects would possibly attempt to copy them.

I will be in Singapore in second and third week of January (for a medical trip to deal with my liver & digestive health problem) if anyone wants to meet to talk with me face-to-face. It would probably be best if there was some angel investment now to help hire another top programmer to accelerate my progress. I am a top programmer and only want to work with the very best due to the Mythical Man Month loses  of productivity due ridiculous amounts of communication load (or miscommunication outcomes) incurred when working with junior programmers.

I can be contacted at my LinkedIn, which is linked in my first blog post.

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 have appreciated that they did this experiment and demonstrated the potential value of a Steem-like concept and I participated sincerely to see what would come of it (which is a concept I was working on before they launched and before I had heard of Steem). I presume they have profited commensurately. And they can make changes now and see how much they can salvage from the existing design and inertia. I am not claiming they can't make some design improvements. I will be watching intently to see what they do.

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.

You still don't seem to comprehend that the issue at hand is the system which enables super whales to allocate the resources of all of us who are invested in Steem. Thus it forces me to invested in what ever @berniesanders does because his footprints are massive compared to us minnows and dolphins. Thus the poorly designed system pits my vested interest against your microcosmic audience.

I maintain that sufficient numbers of the potential audience of millions required for a social media juggernaut would potentially be offended that this site is organized such that super whales such as @berniesanders allocate the resources of everyone invested in Steem and Steem Power, to content that might offend many others, even if not the majority of many others.

I maintain that your microcosmic sample of vote counts herein, and especially given the apparently high quantity of Sybil accounts on Steem, is an entirely meaningless metric which only a marketing idiot would cite.


I didn't write nor implied such in this context. You still don't seemed to understand the issue. I will have no problem with you blogging this art on the social network I will create, because there won't be the paradigm of whales allocating resources on behalf of the collective. My beef was with @berniesanders, not with you. I was trying to get him to see that he reaps what he sows. Since he decided to avail of this "opportunity" to be responsible for allocating the resources on behalf of the collective, then he implicitly accepted the role of a politician. And thus should guide his voting activity accordingly.


Getting more people to join wouldn't help because the attrition rate of Steem has been 85+% since JuneJuly, when I first started analyzing it.

You don't understand why Steem failed and I do, because I predicted (in my posts at Bitcointalk.org) since JuneJuly the exact reason it would fail. That is because of the whale structure (and some other critical reasons).


What will matter is who creates a social network that has the correct fundamental attributes so that different groupings can co-exist without stomping on each other politically and economically.

So when I create that, then it will be quite clear who is not a troll.


The dicktatorship is the whale deciding on the behalf of everyone else what earns and what doesn't.

Apparently it will be difficult for you to recognize maturity when you see it.

---

We will soon see who is relatively poorer. You reap what you sow. I wasn't attacking you. I was trying to help you be more aware of what is required to create a juggernaut and to become very wealthy, while also enabling freedom and innovation.

Yes anyone can write what ever they want, but that wasn't my point.

Hey calm down. I am not attacking you. My point is you get what you sowed. You create a top-down morass, so thus your investment doesn't prosper. You only manage to take money from fools rather than build a juggernaut that could make everyone involved wealthy.

Perhaps you shouldn't pass up a good opportunity to invest in my blockchain project (when and if it is ever launched), because I think I understand how to create a juggernaut. Which is the really my point.

6 months they will have a new project or a revival pivot for Steem. You heard it here second. I posted it first at Bitsharestalk.

Pretty sure the line is "You can checkout anytime you'd like, but you can never leave".

I really like this line. It's one of your best and I couldn't agree more.

What a typo

to work for pennis on steem

Dan couldn't have designed it any better a Hotel California. You can check in but you can never check out. Lol.

Follow-up:

There's no problem with you writing this for your buddies and social media circle. There is a problem with a super whale upvoting it and allocating resources from the collective to your little circle which would be offensive or at least not valuable to most others. Socializing good. Socialism bad. Hope you know the difference.

But you are allocating resources from the collective, or let's say your ill-gotten very large stake from the sneaky "premine". Since you've created this top-down power structure and responsibility, then your actions reflect on everyone.

Well if whales are voting I can't see vesting rewards or witness pay reduced. The withdraw period might be shortened though and the inflation rate reduced.

Just like shareholders in a normal public company.

That's all blockchains are is companies and most issue shares daily.  The distribution concept is nothing new, but you guys can't stop talking about this platform nonstop.  There must me more than just the mundane distribution that keeps you from spending hour after hour of your precious lives babbling endless about another public company.

Just like shareholders in a normal public company.

That's all blockchains are is companies and most issue shares daily.  The distribution concept is nothing new, but you guys can't stop talking about this platform nonstop.  There must me more than just the mundane distribution that keeps you from spending hour after hour of your precious lives babbling endless about another public company.

https://steemit.com/steem/@steemitblog/announcing-steem-0-14-4-shared-db-preview-release

"Blockchain Features on the Short Term (this year) roadmap include:

    Allowing the community to vote on Blockchain Paramaters such as:
    a. Reducing the Inflation Rate
    b. Reducing the Vesting Withdraw Period
    c. Reducing Vesting rewards
    d. Reducing Witness pay
    f. Other properties that are currently hardcoded

    Curation Guilds - allow people to pool and share voting power"

    b. Reducing the Vesting Withdraw Period