Topic: Steem pyramid scheme revealed - page 46. (Read 107058 times)
Now is 0.0026, which is still overvalued, 0.0005 is reasonable actually, this coin won't last for long term because there are so many writers who wanna scam steem.
Well I wasn't going to blog post again until something was fixed in the curation and voting reward algorithms, but then I thought of a potential solution, so I was compelled to post:
https://steemit.com/steem/@anonymint/how-to-fix-steemit-for-communities-and-viral-engagement
This idea came to me while I was going over my design ideas and thinking about if there was any aspect that was easily implementable in Steem.
https://steemit.com/steem/@anonymint/how-to-fix-steemit-for-communities-and-viral-engagement
This idea came to me while I was going over my design ideas and thinking about if there was any aspect that was easily implementable in Steem.
Follow up:
Quote from: @anonymint
In spite of the following, I think my blog is still important for the community to read, because we are brainstorming and discussing the very important design characteristics of Steem.
The important flaws in my proposal were pointed by @alexgr, @sunjata, and @smooth:
I have deeply analyzed in my head (and various writings sprinkled over Steem and Bitcointalk.org) numerous facets and ideas for reducing the top-down effect of (the natural) power-law distributed STEEM POWER w.r.t. to voting for rewards taken from a pool of debasement of the collective, and I can't find any solution that isn't a degenerate outcome that rewards unproductive or winner-take-all behavior. The fundamental problem (design choice) is the rewarding of a collectivized pool of funds via a popularity contest. It is a Tragedy of the Commons. As far as I can see, there is absolutely no way to spread this out to motivate the investment in creating diverse communities.
We can observe recently the whales (or at least apparently @smooth) are spreading their voting out more, so that now the top trending posts typically have much smaller rewards. The only big paying rewards now seem to come when those whales (and perhaps a large contingent of dolphins) who vote less frequently, decide they really value a post such as Dogecoin creator's post today.
But that isn't necessarily motivating community building nor finding (ranking) content relevant to each user's communities. It is a top-down managed effect, and not driving diverse user actions w.r.t. to building followings. The follow and tags features aid somewhat these needs, but it isn't very monetary (mathematically the typical user can't earn more than ~$5 a month on Steem even if rewards of uniformly distributed) as compared to the reach a user can attain on a larger network that doesn't pay anything, e.g. Facebook.
The value of a social network is in the network connections and network size, not in the content. Users (even content producers such as bloggers) go where they can reach their audience (followers/fans) and friends (fans). There won't be viral penetration into the masses (excepting those ones who have a cryptonerd begging them to join Steemit) given there is no compelling reason for them to be on Steemit, i.e. the rewards paid out on average aren't compelling and the network is small with no incentives to drive network connections and no viral engagement paradigm.
In essence what I see on Steemit, are many people joining due to enthusiasm about the idea and thinking that others will too. They view their votes in the site-wide popularity contest as important for influencing this grand "we are changing the world" enthusiasm. It seems to me to be backslapping, but the masses won't see it that way. They will simply ask, "what is the advantage for me".
Edit: the above doesn't necessarily preclude other features and use cases for the Steem blockchain and token that might come to fruition. The onboarding gimmick of voting from a shared pool of debasement could be perhaps just enough to jumpstart an ecosystem, even though it might not (probably won't) virally spread to millions itself. I am skeptical though.
The important flaws in my proposal were pointed by @alexgr, @sunjata, and @smooth:
- Verified accounts can be sold.
- Desired connections between communities dilutes the metric for motivating unique communities.
- Users don't have a strong enough motivation to be verified.
- Intent of following is not a public metric.
I have deeply analyzed in my head (and various writings sprinkled over Steem and Bitcointalk.org) numerous facets and ideas for reducing the top-down effect of (the natural) power-law distributed STEEM POWER w.r.t. to voting for rewards taken from a pool of debasement of the collective, and I can't find any solution that isn't a degenerate outcome that rewards unproductive or winner-take-all behavior. The fundamental problem (design choice) is the rewarding of a collectivized pool of funds via a popularity contest. It is a Tragedy of the Commons. As far as I can see, there is absolutely no way to spread this out to motivate the investment in creating diverse communities.
We can observe recently the whales (or at least apparently @smooth) are spreading their voting out more, so that now the top trending posts typically have much smaller rewards. The only big paying rewards now seem to come when those whales (and perhaps a large contingent of dolphins) who vote less frequently, decide they really value a post such as Dogecoin creator's post today.
But that isn't necessarily motivating community building nor finding (ranking) content relevant to each user's communities. It is a top-down managed effect, and not driving diverse user actions w.r.t. to building followings. The follow and tags features aid somewhat these needs, but it isn't very monetary (mathematically the typical user can't earn more than ~$5 a month on Steem even if rewards of uniformly distributed) as compared to the reach a user can attain on a larger network that doesn't pay anything, e.g. Facebook.
The value of a social network is in the network connections and network size, not in the content. Users (even content producers such as bloggers) go where they can reach their audience (followers/fans) and friends (fans). There won't be viral penetration into the masses (excepting those ones who have a cryptonerd begging them to join Steemit) given there is no compelling reason for them to be on Steemit, i.e. the rewards paid out on average aren't compelling and the network is small with no incentives to drive network connections and no viral engagement paradigm.
In essence what I see on Steemit, are many people joining due to enthusiasm about the idea and thinking that others will too. They view their votes in the site-wide popularity contest as important for influencing this grand "we are changing the world" enthusiasm. It seems to me to be backslapping, but the masses won't see it that way. They will simply ask, "what is the advantage for me".
Edit: the above doesn't necessarily preclude other features and use cases for the Steem blockchain and token that might come to fruition. The onboarding gimmick of voting from a shared pool of debasement could be perhaps just enough to jumpstart an ecosystem, even though it might not (probably won't) virally spread to millions itself. I am skeptical though.
The following blog post quotes are confirmation to me of my idea that the relevance of community is essential to viral adoption:
Quote from: @sift666
I had bugger all Facebook friends, and most of them were “lurkers” (they never posted anything or even “liked” anything, let alone made any comments. So meaningful interactions were few and far between.
About half of what few friends I had left on FB disagreed with much of what I really wanted to post about, so if I got into subjects like conspiracies such as false flag shootings or “climate change”, or health subjects like low carb diets or the vaccination con, its safe to say I rapidly had less FB friends.
That giant pool of Facebook users don’t post much worth seeing, so to me FB was like a giant sponge that soaked up every creative urge in my mind and replaced it with a giant sea of shallow distracting crap.
The biggest reason I quit FB was that I wanted to see new ideas and be inspired by intelligent discussion. That wasn’t exactly coming thick and fast on FB
About half of what few friends I had left on FB disagreed with much of what I really wanted to post about, so if I got into subjects like conspiracies such as false flag shootings or “climate change”, or health subjects like low carb diets or the vaccination con, its safe to say I rapidly had less FB friends.
That giant pool of Facebook users don’t post much worth seeing, so to me FB was like a giant sponge that soaked up every creative urge in my mind and replaced it with a giant sea of shallow distracting crap.
The biggest reason I quit FB was that I wanted to see new ideas and be inspired by intelligent discussion. That wasn’t exactly coming thick and fast on FB
The following appears to incorporate some amount of "we will change the world" backslapping because he doesn't even mention having tried Medium for comparison:
Quote from: @sift666
Steemit has already amazed me with the quality of the content. I’ve only been aware of Steemit for 48 hours, but I’m already inspired by what I’ve seen here, and I’ve learned more in two days surfing Steemit than I did in the past two years feeding my FB addiction.
What I think is inspiring him is he sees some of his interests are shared by the community on Steemit. The Steemit crowd is probably into the specific idealistic issues he mentioned. And there are some smart Steemians. But I believe this sub-community can also be found on Medium (but perhaps not as highly charged and massive)?
Any way, the point taken is that communities and size of network (connections and engagement) within the communities is essential, which is my point also.
Quote from: @churdtzu
the quality of content on Steemit is incredible
Is it the quality of intellectualism and prose, or predominantly the quality that the content matches your interests?
Quote from: @churdtzu
Here, people have to make content which is truly engaging
Engaging as in much discussion and spawning communities of like interests? Or appealing to the site-wide most prevalent desires the voter has to upvote if the post games some emotional need the voters have, such as the desire to get others to promote certain causes, the male desire to see girls show their boobs, the "Steem will change the world" meme, etc..
Quote from: @govspiders
I agree with the premise of content quality finding its worth in votes
I'm skeptical for the reasons above.
Quote from: @churdtzu
When would demand leave though?
Because not everyone shares the same interests and they may not find their engaging connections here?
Because the rewards for most users will be less than $5 per month, i.e. meaningless?
Medium reports only 20,000 of its 25 million readers blog weekly. Blogging is not something everyone can do well. So what do the rest of the users do that is engaging?
Quote from: @churdtzu
The more likely scenario in that situation would be that the dollar/BTC value of Steem would approach zero.
Which would disincentivize cashing out at some level above zero, because of the cost of cashing out isn't 0.
Quote from: @sift666
Facebook has over 1.7 billion users, while Steemit has less than 100 000, so at this point Steemit would still need to get 1700 times more members to be as big as FB.
The sobering truth is Steem may only have about 10,000 active users and we don't know how many of those are bots.
https://steemit.com/@steemit/transfers
https://steemit.com/@ned/transfers
https://steemit.com/@dantheman/transfers
Those are steem founders's wallets, they own a shit loads of steem yes i know. They own about 80% of steem .
You know what's funny is that they tell you to power up but they are powering down all 3 accounts and cashing out $2 Millions every week.
And fools on poloniex are buying up all the steems hahah and best of all the founders's money is growing extremely fast so they have essentially set up a system where they could cash out $2M every week for life until the ponzi come crashing down of course but these devs are fucking geniuses.
It doesn't end there though, they have designed a system where they have so much voting power compared to everyone else that they decide where the pool's money is being allocated, so if they want to pay themselves and their buddies they can do it just by a mouse click.
They can also create sockpuppets account and vote for themselves.It's like a fucking cartel, they are the first crypto mafia.
They also get to decide what goes on the front page so obviously they chose to upvote boobs and steem praise, there is nothing better than vagina to prop up a massive bubble.
In 3 years all the new steem power that was created out of thin air to enrich the devs will be detroyed at a ratio of 10 to 1. So if you have 10 SP they will burn 9 from you and everyone else including themselves, But they don't care becasue in 3 years the devs will be in their private yacht sipping mojito with lots of bitches while you will be powering down but it's gonna be too late my friend.
And you know what they say when you ask but why are you destroying 90% of my wealth in 3 year? They say don't worry hopefully the price will increase to make up for it rofl It will not because they would have crashed it to pay for the yatch lol
RIP steem power holders.
http://thestringpuller.com/2016/07/a-steeming-bubble/
edit : Dan has deleted transaction history on one of his account. https://steemit.com/@steem/transfers
Money senta few days ago from https://steemit.com/@steemit/transfers is not showing as received on the steem account like it usually does. I don't know exactly why he doesn't want us to see the transactions but it looks like he is trying to hide something. Fishy
https://steemit.com/@ned/transfers
https://steemit.com/@dantheman/transfers
Those are steem founders's wallets, they own a shit loads of steem yes i know. They own about 80% of steem .
You know what's funny is that they tell you to power up but they are powering down all 3 accounts and cashing out $2 Millions every week.
And fools on poloniex are buying up all the steems hahah and best of all the founders's money is growing extremely fast so they have essentially set up a system where they could cash out $2M every week for life until the ponzi come crashing down of course but these devs are fucking geniuses.
It doesn't end there though, they have designed a system where they have so much voting power compared to everyone else that they decide where the pool's money is being allocated, so if they want to pay themselves and their buddies they can do it just by a mouse click.
They can also create sockpuppets account and vote for themselves.It's like a fucking cartel, they are the first crypto mafia.
They also get to decide what goes on the front page so obviously they chose to upvote boobs and steem praise, there is nothing better than vagina to prop up a massive bubble.
In 3 years all the new steem power that was created out of thin air to enrich the devs will be detroyed at a ratio of 10 to 1. So if you have 10 SP they will burn 9 from you and everyone else including themselves, But they don't care becasue in 3 years the devs will be in their private yacht sipping mojito with lots of bitches while you will be powering down but it's gonna be too late my friend.
And you know what they say when you ask but why are you destroying 90% of my wealth in 3 year? They say don't worry hopefully the price will increase to make up for it rofl It will not because they would have crashed it to pay for the yatch lol
RIP steem power holders.
http://thestringpuller.com/2016/07/a-steeming-bubble/
edit : Dan has deleted transaction history on one of his account. https://steemit.com/@steem/transfers
Money senta few days ago from https://steemit.com/@steemit/transfers is not showing as received on the steem account like it usually does. I don't know exactly why he doesn't want us to see the transactions but it looks like he is trying to hide something. Fishy
O thanks for telling me years later that these are all scams... fuck man i wouldn't have touched coins that made me a millionaire,.....
Well I wasn't going to blog post again until something was fixed in the curation and voting reward algorithms, but then I thought of a potential solution, so I was compelled to post:
https://steemit.com/steem/@anonymint/how-to-fix-steemit-for-communities-and-viral-engagement
This idea came to me while I was going over my design ideas and thinking about if there was any aspect that was easily implementable in Steem.
https://steemit.com/steem/@anonymint/how-to-fix-steemit-for-communities-and-viral-engagement
This idea came to me while I was going over my design ideas and thinking about if there was any aspect that was easily implementable in Steem.
Why would he take 200$ for 1500SP? I don't think he'll take the offer.
I'll hedge my bets a little bit if the opportunity presents itself:
I'll offer you $200 in BTC, and if I am able to get more than $1000 out (via powering down and exchange to poloniex), then I will split the difference of the remainder that I can get out in (as measured in BTC value I get out).
So you retain some upside if the price rises, you get some immediately liquidity out and protect yourself against total collapse of the price.
I have a 3 year reputation in crypto, see my introduceyourself post, so I would not reneg on the terms since it would disrupt my reputation which is very valuable to me.
So you retain some upside if the price rises, you get some immediately liquidity out and protect yourself against total collapse of the price.
I have a 3 year reputation in crypto, see my introduceyourself post, so I would not reneg on the terms since it would disrupt my reputation which is very valuable to me.
r0ach I made this post in honor of you master Yoda:
How did you know about my Yoda silver bullion?
And how can you leave after I pioneered a new Steemit subforum:
https://steemit.com/trending/anonymintwilldisagree
I'll be gone for some days or so:
I wish I could crumple your tinfoil hat into a 1" diameter ball and see if any brains oozed out. You really understand the masses well don't you. Do you think they will also stock their basements with MREs.
Thanks guys for the discussion.
It can't be paying only for long-form blogging because Medium reports that only 20,000 of its 25 million readers actually blog every week. Expert blogging is not something most people can do well. Perhaps only 15% of the people who join Steem(it) actually earn anything and only 1% anything resembling an income. This is not viral spread, because 85+% of those who join will get exasperated. The cryptonerds are begging their friends and gfs to join, but it isn't moving beyond that one degree of relation.
So yeah the concept of onboarding via debasement distributed to users is innovative, but unfortunately we are failing with this design. Sorry to say. Mark my word.
So yeah the concept of onboarding via debasement distributed to users is innovative, but unfortunately we are failing with this design. Sorry to say. Mark my word.
Quote from: @joelhovell
Absolutely @dollarvigilante, Steemit will probably be that 'gateway drug' for people who know nothing about cryptos and finally get on board once they realize the dollar and other fiat currencies are in trouble due to gov't manipulation.
I wish I could crumple your tinfoil hat into a 1" diameter ball and see if any brains oozed out. You really understand the masses well don't you. Do you think they will also stock their basements with MREs.
Thanks guys for the discussion.
I read somewhere the point that live video rarely ever suffers from being plagiarism. Also my point it is something everyone can do. Click the links in the text below:
I made the similar observation and explained in detail with examples at the above linked discussion thread. I would like to read your feedback.
With all of this being said, Steemit in my newbie opinion could suffer the same fate if people simply write or share content based upon how many votes, money or comments received.
I made the similar observation and explained in detail with examples at the above linked discussion thread. I would like to read your feedback.
Sure thing @anonymit. I'll check it out. I don't personally use Snapchat but to take a crack at your question, if the system is not based on likes then simply put, people must want to see your content. Seeing how manipulation of Youtube, Facebook and Twitter Snapchat may not be as manipulated as easily.
I have further thoughts at another blog that it is the interaction and user engagement of video that makes it more of bidirectional media than static content publishing. I agree that Likes (votes) are not a user engagement metric.
Realize Facebook Likes are not going to survive as a value proposition.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag (given to me here)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOE1HFEL8XA
The only freedom the Larimers support is the freedom to pimp out women over the internet as long as they're getting a cut of the proceeds. So, if you want to strip naked or post degrading pictures of women you're in luck
This sounds like a great system.
I don't think those girls would be there if they weren't enticed by $1000+ rewards for just taking a few photos.
But I wonder if you two aren't missing the point that people like to have fun. A social networking site can't be all serious and only about valuable production.
What am I missing? Seems r0ach wants a social network to be about social ethics and social production optimization?
I agree of course that if the site is unidimensionally focused on bimbos and cryptoculture then it won't go far. Is that the essence of your complaints too?
It's more like this:
You've got a point there.
I wonder to what extent the youth prefer virtual sex to real sex. In Japan, the youth don't want to procreate any more. But then they don't need real girl tits, as the anime variety is more fantastical.
r0ach I made this post in honor of you master Yoda:
https://steemit.com/life/@sweetsssj/kissing-santorini-s-magical-blue-sea#@anonymint/re-tomkirkham-re-sweetsssj-kissing-santorini-s-magical-blue-sea-20160813t093355328z
P.S. I replied on your latest blog.
Same blog author:
That fluffy white cat with the big eyes that you are holding in the yard is very cute. What breed is that?
We were walking in the appliance section when my gf first saw that THE SECRET LIFE OF PETS on the flatscreen and I couldn't get her unglued from it. It is funny and cute. Some (most?) girls really love cute animals. I guess it is part of their instinct to adore and nurture (kids).
I think you need more girls and Asians on this site to appreciate that stuff. I notice the Asians are really getting into virtual anime, online digital art, and cutesy stuff. The Western ladies are more into tangible art and volunteerism that involves real interaction with community. Asians are more into cliques of friends. Well at least that is my impression since I live in Philippines and have visited Hong Kong. What is your perspective?
We were walking in the appliance section when my gf first saw that THE SECRET LIFE OF PETS on the flatscreen and I couldn't get her unglued from it. It is funny and cute. Some (most?) girls really love cute animals. I guess it is part of their instinct to adore and nurture (kids).
I think you need more girls and Asians on this site to appreciate that stuff. I notice the Asians are really getting into virtual anime, online digital art, and cutesy stuff. The Western ladies are more into tangible art and volunteerism that involves real interaction with community. Asians are more into cliques of friends. Well at least that is my impression since I live in Philippines and have visited Hong Kong. What is your perspective?
My understanding is that Asians have to save face, status is also respected which can be inhibiting, and Asians are expected to respect authority thus they are sheltered and shy.
Whereas, in the West we don't respect anyone nor anything and do what ever the fuck we want, which has its tradeoffs.
Even within Asians, there are some significant differences between for example filipinos and Chinese, e.g. Chinese are mostly atheists and thus see no ethical problem with rampant use of birth control.
It seems to me though that Chinese can also be quite stubborn and do what every they want, for example deciding to sleep on display sofa in the furniture store, cursing, and spitting/urinating on the sidewalk. Maybe that is only the lower classes who do that?
I also noticed it is more difficult to break into North Asians cliques, than for example filipinos and Thais, who are more friendly. The North Asians are somewhat more reserved and colder like their colder climate.
Well it doesn't stop some Chinese ladies on my visits to Hong Kong from giving me the eye. So I guess some phenomena work the same every where, lol. Not implying anything about you and your (middle class girl?) white & nerdy friends obviously.
Whereas, in the West we don't respect anyone nor anything and do what ever the fuck we want, which has its tradeoffs.
Even within Asians, there are some significant differences between for example filipinos and Chinese, e.g. Chinese are mostly atheists and thus see no ethical problem with rampant use of birth control.
It seems to me though that Chinese can also be quite stubborn and do what every they want, for example deciding to sleep on display sofa in the furniture store, cursing, and spitting/urinating on the sidewalk. Maybe that is only the lower classes who do that?
I also noticed it is more difficult to break into North Asians cliques, than for example filipinos and Thais, who are more friendly. The North Asians are somewhat more reserved and colder like their colder climate.
Well it doesn't stop some Chinese ladies on my visits to Hong Kong from giving me the eye. So I guess some phenomena work the same every where, lol. Not implying anything about you and your (middle class girl?) white & nerdy friends obviously.
Holy Sweetjesssusj! Asian baby got back.
Anonymizer and Smooth, I need you to look at my tiered benefits proposal for Steem to see if you think it would benefit the system or not:
https://steemit.com/steem/@r0achtheunsavory/steem-is-much-more-inclined-to-a-tiered-rewards-system-rather-than-linear-scale
https://steemit.com/steem/@r0achtheunsavory/steem-is-much-more-inclined-to-a-tiered-rewards-system-rather-than-linear-scale
@biophil is the game theory researcher:
Even if we set a threshold for voting above the level given to free signup accounts, the attacker could buy STEEM POWER and vote his free signup accounts above the threshold. Then consolidate them by using them to vote (or just continue voting them up from his STEEM POWER) to reach the threshold for powering them down.
The point is that if we allow voting to be linear it enables targeting which accounts we want to transfer value to via voting, and popularity of the content becomes irrelevant in this attack.
I assume you mean that if we can identify account holders then we can prevent Sybil attacks on free signups. But this isn't the only vulnerability with 1-account-1-vote (linear) weighting. Besides, account verification will likely drastically curtail signups, because nobody likes to be forced to do KYC just so they can try the site and vote.
In my opinion, unfortunately (or fortunately for me) it is impossible to fix without discarding the concept of voting from a shared debasement pool. I am moving on to completely redesigning a Steem-like onboarding mechanism
Quote from: @biophil
I'm not completely sure I understand your 2nd bullet on #1. Is it assuming that I go grab a huge pile of free signups, and then have each of them post articles and they all vote on one another's articles?
Even if we set a threshold for voting above the level given to free signup accounts, the attacker could buy STEEM POWER and vote his free signup accounts above the threshold. Then consolidate them by using them to vote (or just continue voting them up from his STEEM POWER) to reach the threshold for powering them down.
The point is that if we allow voting to be linear it enables targeting which accounts we want to transfer value to via voting, and popularity of the content becomes irrelevant in this attack.
Quote from: @biophil
I think we need to very carefully consider how a 1-account-1-vote might be implemented via a semi-autonomous verification system.
I assume you mean that if we can identify account holders then we can prevent Sybil attacks on free signups. But this isn't the only vulnerability with 1-account-1-vote (linear) weighting. Besides, account verification will likely drastically curtail signups, because nobody likes to be forced to do KYC just so they can try the site and vote.
Quote from: @biophil
As things stand right now, the big voters are simply too big for minnows to have any financial incentive to stick around.
In my opinion, unfortunately (or fortunately for me) it is impossible to fix without discarding the concept of voting from a shared debasement pool. I am moving on to completely redesigning a Steem-like onboarding mechanism
I mean, let's say I know you are going to vote anonymint with 80% chance, then my risk is too low. He'll get my upvote quickly to front-run "smooth the whale". Now repeat this with every other whale and their favorite authors, or even comment authors, and you are suddenly milking the curation through automation via a robotic circle-jerk. Humans are pretty "low entropy" in their behavior and it's not gonna get better anytime soon.
Having said that, we are far from being in a totally broken system.
Having said that, we are far from being in a totally broken system.
This is why I vote people like heiditravels 30mins to an hr after she blogs, there's never a shortage of whales on those. It's amazing how many people do the same.
I agree with iamnotback that it's hard to form a community when whale votes are the only ones that really count. Every other vote is almost negligible
Although I agree with @smooth that the rewards system does find a way to pay out some of the authors who can consistently deliver reasonable quality content, the problem for Steem is not whether the content is quality or not. IMO, this is entirely underappreciating that the value of social networks is not the content, but rather the connections in the network (and the impact that has on viral adoption and ecosystem network effects).
To be more precise, curation is only rewarded if the groupthink recognizes the blog posts. And so all the incentives in the system are designed around curating content that will appeal widely, not specifically to any sub-group.
The rewards system is creating a rigor mortis of structure that forms a groupthink that discourages the formation of more connections in sub-groups. From my analysis, I think this can't be fixed in any way through voting. It is fundamental and as I wrote way upthread weeks ago, they won't be able to fix this without entirely changing the reasons to own STEEM POWER (thus violating the current vested interests) and thus I think it is impossible for Steem to be fixed (which some people have noted in some aspects in their replies when Dan mentioned removing curator rewards).
You may argue that multiple genres can be popular simultaneously, but the economic force is encouraging centralization and this can't be solved without discarding the concept of voting from a shared debasement pool...
Yeah that is my point, it is benefiting me too much, because that huge burst of votes is getting me always into the attention zone where my blogs can at least make it to $300 with one minor whale or a few dolphins. And then reasonably good chance a more significant whale will vote because I am writing about important tech stuff they can appreciate.
So it creating a groupthink. They aren't making any curation decision. They are just trusting my skills are reasonably consistent, per my track record.
We can't have relevance without thought. And we can't have successful site without relevance.
My analysis is everything is out-of-whack on Steem and it will fail. I am now about 95% sure of it. Next stage is for me to decide if it can realistically be fixed.
I can't detail all my reasons. I made a short list today upthread. I am very sleepy right now so I can't post very coherently until after I awake.
So it creating a groupthink. They aren't making any curation decision. They are just trusting my skills are reasonably consistent, per my track record.
We can't have relevance without thought. And we can't have successful site without relevance.
My analysis is everything is out-of-whack on Steem and it will fail. I am now about 95% sure of it. Next stage is for me to decide if it can realistically be fixed.
I can't detail all my reasons. I made a short list today upthread. I am very sleepy right now so I can't post very coherently until after I awake.
The reason it can't be fixed through voting is because the only way to prevent voting from being gameable by collusion groups, is to have the whales there to stomp on any such attempts. But the whales can't be a spontaneous proliferation of sub-communities. I explained this in my recent blog:
https://steemit.com/steem/@anonymint/blog-rewards-can-t-be-widely-distributed
And in my numerous comments on @dantheman's blog post:
https://steemit.com/steem/@dantheman/people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards#@anonymint/re-dantheman-people-rank-using-page-rank-algorithm-for-better-curation-and-rewards-20160811t031807328z
Also read the comment trail here:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@chitty/whale-s-dilemma#@dantheman/re-chitty-whale-s-dilemma-20160812t155654929z
If the content starts to suck, you will lose your audience and stop getting votes, with the same incentives working in reverse. The later votes will disappear and then the earlier votes (which exist because of the later votes) will unwind too.
This, frankly, is exactly what people want in a content source.
This, frankly, is exactly what people want in a content source.
The content doesn't suck when the metric is overall groupthink approval, but it sucks because it wasn't targeted to any following. And that is absolutely essential. Make sure you understand this. Because this is my secret weapon that I will use to compete.
You can try creating a site where content is completely blind without any labeling of authorship or brand and instead every post has to be individually evaluated in a vacuum, but I'm virtually certain it will fail (except perhaps due to its novelty value as a sort of game).
Of course I am not going to tell anyone now the algorithms I have in mind, but let me just say I solved the Grassmannian problem that @complexring spoke of.
The problem with the algorithm I had presented is that it had no reference point and everything was relative to everything else, so this superimposed it on a manifold of itself. This is why it isn't stable. We obfuscated with the relativity that we really have insufficient information to solve (all of externalities) the variables.
And I need to entirely get rid of voting. Everything will be entirely determined automatically from user actions (which can't be Sybil attacked in my formulation).
This is going to be deep. And sorry for talking about vaporware, but you said can't. And I think can. I'll try to speed up so we can publish specifics so you aren't debating againts something unspecified. At least you have my blog post as a rough idea of where I am headed.
But the economic incentives in my design will be much more attuned to the fact that 1/1000 users are good bloggers. I have an incentive for the other 999 which they can do.
Also my model is not specific to blogging but works with any content publishing and distribution, such as music promotion.
- No one is investing in creating communities (plural) because there is no monetary incentive to plant a homestead on Steem. Rather everyone is extracting from the groupthink. The exodus out of SP may have already started as I've seen some of the star ladies taking money out. Everybody is gaming the system, there is minimal investment into it. @smooth even you gamed it by mining it (no offense intended and thanks for sharing the love a bit)
I think a lot of that is the organization of the web site. There is nothng at all like a subreddit, personal or group home page, group feature with memberships, or other community features of any kind. The categories feature is underdeveloped and doesn't really work. In fact the whole web site seems like a afterthought that is poorly developed (though I wouldn't take anything away from their building a reasonably decent web wallet and blockchain explorer for the content; that was a significant effort).
I don't see any of the upcoming competing sites doing anything any better though.
I also agree with the later comments about voter apathy.
For as long as they have the voting feature, it won't matter much how they change the UI because the voting feature will just be noise relative to the sub-community groups. It has no relevance at all. And economically everyone will still be competing for the groupthink popular vote. As I argued to you several times upthread, but you just don't seem to get my point, is that 1 + 1 = -1, not 2 in this case. The monetary incentive is creating an ecosystem design to do one thing well and nothing else.
You can't readily see the -1 effect, because what we see is a lot of reasonable quality posts at the top of the rewards ranking. But the -1 effect is in all the lost sub-communities that are not spawning.
What I am trying to solve in terms of automatically ranking content well for relevance is something none of the social networks have solved, except Google seems to have done a good job with search. I will use the knowledge of the HIVE to solve it, but viewing the HIVE as a collection of sub-groups, not of one-mind (popularity). Scaling the algorithm required using decentralization of computation+storage to solve it, because there is no way it would fit into DRAM on a server.
Even Medium is trying to move away from the long-form format, because they realize only 1/1000 can contribute and engage. They found that most of the 25 million readers don't even login.
I don't find liquidity to be all that low. You can easily trade $10Ks of both STEEM and SBD in a relatively short time with little problem. $100K if you are willing to move the market.
John McAfee said he declined to take a $600K investment because "you can buy in, but you can't get out". Perhaps he was referring to the STEEM POWER 2 year divestment delay?
Yes, when I first saw his comments I figured that's what he must have meant. Or maybe he waits to be able to trade out in an instant (in which case I agree with him), I don't know.
I don't find liquidity to be all that low. You can easily trade $10Ks of both STEEM and SBD in a relatively short time with little problem. $100K if you are willing to move the market.
John McAfee said he declined to take a $600K investment because "you can buy in, but you can't get out". Perhaps he was referring to the STEEM POWER 2 year divestment delay?
P.S. Interesting story about John:
http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-what-really-happened-in-belize-2016-5
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-insane-life-of-john-mcafee-2015-7/#mcafee-didnt-make-things-any-easier-for-himself-in-2013-he-uploaded-a-bizarre-video-entitled-how-to-uninstall-mcafee-antivirus-it-showed-him-surrounded-by-scantily-clad-women-while-trying-to-uninstall-the-software-he-invented-which-he-denounced-after-leaving-the-company-the-video-also-showed-guns-and-allusions-to-drugs-and-drug-use-although-it-was-undoubtedly-meant-to-be-some-sort-of-parody-2220
https://steemit.com/mcafee/@cryptoshow/that-time-i-shared-bath-salts-with-john-mcafee
http://techgenix.com/mathematics-ethereum-hack/
Edit: I see John and I have a connection from the past:
Breaking bread with MGT board member @NolanBushnell of Atari fame.
I post this here mainly because she mentions her friends having abandoned Steemit already (dunno if it is relevant as she may just be a defeatist or perhaps disabled from the neck down?):
I am trying to write about my interests but no one seems interested as it's not what there looking for BUT thank you for popping in
I am not asking what they are not liking. I am asking you who will like your writing? Try to think about who shares your interests? Do you have a lot of friends that you share links to things online with in other social networks? Identify who your audience is, then we can figure why your audience is not here on Steem yet.
Thank you but I really don't have many friends. I'm disabled and housebound the people I joined up with on here have just about stopped writing so my network is pretty dead. Thank you for trying to help I appreciate it but unfortunately I am a lost cause
Well don't give up on yourself, even if Steemit can't help you. I am blinded in one eye, I have been dealing with a very bad chronic illness which has effects similar to Multiple Sclerosis, but I didn't stop trying to do something with myself. No matter how much more difficult it was to do the things that I used to do before I got in this condition, I still push myself to try to do. There was two years lost to a daily frustration of mostly collapsing back into the bed after every few hours of trying to do and not getting anything done. I think what helped me in my case is:
I think the first thing you need to do is find your life outside of Steemit, before you can make an impact on social networking.
If your handicap doesn't prevent you from traveling, how about traveling to some place of poverty and working with the kids there to inspire them? Something like that. Spending your days playing and interacting with people who may look up to you as a role model who cared enough to spend the time with them.
I think if you posted very large and high quality photos (note readers are visual and the photos you've posted in your blogs have not been good) of yourself accomplishing great things in spite of being handicapped and explained how you had overcome, I think you would get a lot of respect on Steemit and gain a lot of income. They might even fund you to be able to continue doing.
But mostly do it for yourself, not for the money. Find your purpose to still be here on earth alive. I am confident you can do it. It is all about how you view life. I often forget I am blinded in one eye. I just imagine I am not blinded, and so I am not. I focus on what I can do, not what I can't do.
Apologies if I don't have the time to actually help you do it. I enjoy being a motivational doer role model. But at age 51 and in my current condition I can't actively help as many people as I used to do in my younger age, I am spread too thin and can only offer my words of encouragement.
Take care.
EDIT: Just to expand on that a little bit, you've got to find something that makes you feel important, loved, and appreciated. Even if you are handicapped from the neck down, find someone to wheel you around who feels important doing it, and then go to Africa where you are a role model because you are white and there are so many neglected kids who need a grandma or big sister who loves them. Just an idea, and maybe you have a better one because you know your interests better than I do.
P.S. I read this to my gf to ask her if it sounded patronizing or BS, and I couldn't stop myself from crying while I was reading it to her (fucking eh not something I want to boast to a group of males). Apparently the emotions of how difficult of a struggle this has been, are more intense than I normally think about. It is normal I guess that I don't normally want to think about it. Always trying to do, and not wallow in thinking about it. Grrrr. Fight on!
Quote from: @karenb54
Quote from: @anonmint
Quote from: @karenb54
Quote from: @anonmint
Since you (attempted to) read my recent blog post and commented there, I came over here to see if there was something I could suggest or respond to. I don't have much time, but I will give a little bit of it to you because I care.
To drive more interaction, we need to ways to allows users to form interest groups. Limiting activity to force people to behave a certain way will just send them fleeing the site to something that allows them to do what they want.
My suggestion to you is to think about your interests and who would share them with you. And then tell us why you can't reach those interested people on Steem.
To drive more interaction, we need to ways to allows users to form interest groups. Limiting activity to force people to behave a certain way will just send them fleeing the site to something that allows them to do what they want.
My suggestion to you is to think about your interests and who would share them with you. And then tell us why you can't reach those interested people on Steem.
I am trying to write about my interests but no one seems interested as it's not what there looking for BUT thank you for popping in
I am not asking what they are not liking. I am asking you who will like your writing? Try to think about who shares your interests? Do you have a lot of friends that you share links to things online with in other social networks? Identify who your audience is, then we can figure why your audience is not here on Steem yet.
Thank you but I really don't have many friends. I'm disabled and housebound the people I joined up with on here have just about stopped writing so my network is pretty dead. Thank you for trying to help I appreciate it but unfortunately I am a lost cause
Well don't give up on yourself, even if Steemit can't help you. I am blinded in one eye, I have been dealing with a very bad chronic illness which has effects similar to Multiple Sclerosis, but I didn't stop trying to do something with myself. No matter how much more difficult it was to do the things that I used to do before I got in this condition, I still push myself to try to do. There was two years lost to a daily frustration of mostly collapsing back into the bed after every few hours of trying to do and not getting anything done. I think what helped me in my case is:
- I'm a male, so have some natural fight (testosterone) inside me. Also I'd been a American football player and all-around athlete, so I'm historically very competitive and hate to lose or give up.
- I love doing sports activities so much, that even it was struggle to do those, my memories of how much I love it, propelled me forward to fight to continue to do it, even it was miserable and painful. And now lately, my healthy is improving somewhat and starting to have some good or better days.
- I could still use my mind sometimes (even though this was also difficult due to headaches, chronic fatigue, stomach pains, etc) and I've been prolific in the past with accomplishments in computer programming employing my mind.
I think the first thing you need to do is find your life outside of Steemit, before you can make an impact on social networking.
If your handicap doesn't prevent you from traveling, how about traveling to some place of poverty and working with the kids there to inspire them? Something like that. Spending your days playing and interacting with people who may look up to you as a role model who cared enough to spend the time with them.
I think if you posted very large and high quality photos (note readers are visual and the photos you've posted in your blogs have not been good) of yourself accomplishing great things in spite of being handicapped and explained how you had overcome, I think you would get a lot of respect on Steemit and gain a lot of income. They might even fund you to be able to continue doing.
But mostly do it for yourself, not for the money. Find your purpose to still be here on earth alive. I am confident you can do it. It is all about how you view life. I often forget I am blinded in one eye. I just imagine I am not blinded, and so I am not. I focus on what I can do, not what I can't do.
Apologies if I don't have the time to actually help you do it. I enjoy being a motivational doer role model. But at age 51 and in my current condition I can't actively help as many people as I used to do in my younger age, I am spread too thin and can only offer my words of encouragement.
Take care.
EDIT: Just to expand on that a little bit, you've got to find something that makes you feel important, loved, and appreciated. Even if you are handicapped from the neck down, find someone to wheel you around who feels important doing it, and then go to Africa where you are a role model because you are white and there are so many neglected kids who need a grandma or big sister who loves them. Just an idea, and maybe you have a better one because you know your interests better than I do.
P.S. I read this to my gf to ask her if it sounded patronizing or BS, and I couldn't stop myself from crying while I was reading it to her (fucking eh not something I want to boast to a group of males). Apparently the emotions of how difficult of a struggle this has been, are more intense than I normally think about. It is normal I guess that I don't normally want to think about it. Always trying to do, and not wallow in thinking about it. Grrrr. Fight on!
What do you guys think of my list of the main problems of Steem?
I mostly agree with your points. I will quibble on a few details but that doesn't constitute overall disagreement.
Is the high debasement rate on STEEM that is making the liquidity so low (because only 3% of the money supply is powered down into liquid STEEM)?
Or is that the money supply was increasing 10 fold over the past months still at a 300% per annum rate, thus market cap is not a true indicator of the actual investor interest?
I don't find liquidity to be all that low. You can easily trade $10Ks of both STEEM and SBD in a relatively short time with little problem. $100K if you are willing to move the market.
It is slightly lower than other coins with similar market cap, but within the overall range based on my experience trading it and other coins. (I don't know of a useful and accurate objective metric of liquidity that is easy to obtain but trading volume is an often-quoted approximation and while it is lower than some other coins it isn't terrible; 3x DOGE or XMR today for example.)
But that may be based on the high short-term supply rate as you suggested. As the rate of new supply begins to approach its longer-term equilibrium with a huge portion of the supply locked in SP, the liquidity may further erode.
Quote
- No one is investing in creating communities (plural) because there is no monetary incentive to plant a homestead on Steem. Rather everyone is extracting from the groupthink. The exodus out of SP may have already started as I've seen some of the star ladies taking money out. Everybody is gaming the system, there is minimal investment into it. @smooth even you gamed it by mining it (no offense intended and thanks for sharing the love a bit)
I think a lot of that is the organization of the web site. There is nothng at all like a subreddit, personal or group home page, group feature with memberships, or other community features of any kind. The categories feature is underdeveloped and doesn't really work. In fact the whole web site seems like a afterthought that is poorly developed (though I wouldn't take anything away from their building a reasonably decent web wallet and blockchain explorer for the content; that was a significant effort).
Quote
- The viral growth is not working because perhaps only 15% of the people who join earn anything worth mentioning and perhaps only 1% earn anything like an income. So I assume this isn't spreading beyond the first degree of relation from the exuberant cryptonerd that begs their friends to try it.
I find the growth on the slow side but I don't really agree with the reasons you put forward. Most people are never going to earn anything like an income from a social media site, so this is somewhat of a straw man. People will join because it is fun period, or because it is fun to earn even a little (or both). But if you are saying that the viral growth was supposed to be from significant earnings (like an income) and that part isn't working then I agree.
Although I would say that even today viral growth appears to be working among successful bloggers. They are getting significant earnings and recruiting their colleagues, who in many cases are doing the same (so literally viral growth). The bloggers may bring the readers. Perhaps with more readers that will bring more bloggers (even without direct recruitment). So this could work. I'm not sure.
Quote
- Steem has the wrong promotional model for long-form blogging because Medium has found that only 20,000 serious bloggers serve 25 million readers, i.e. telling people they can easily earn $1000s on blogging is attracting the wrong demographics. Instead it should be telling them they can earn money doing something they can actually do well:
So Medium has found that 1/1000 of the user base earns anything significant. I find that number very reasonable and I doubt that is going to change. If something needs to change it may be the growth model beyond that 1/1000, to the extent that it is too tied to earnings. I don't see any of the upcoming competing sites doing anything any better though.
I also agree with the later comments about voter apathy.
Quote
@smooth even you gamed it by mining it (no offense intended and thanks for sharing the love a bit)
None taken and I agree I absolutely gamed the mining of it. It was set up to almost require that someone do that. If it wasn't me and the few others who did, it would be someone else.
I mean, let's say I know you are going to vote anonymint with 80% chance, then my risk is too low. He'll get my upvote quickly to front-run "smooth the whale". Now repeat this with every other whale and their favorite authors, or even comment authors, and you are suddenly milking the curation through automation via a robotic circle-jerk. Humans are pretty "low entropy" in their behavior and it's not gonna get better anytime soon.
Having said that, we are far from being in a totally broken system.
This is why I vote people like heiditravels 30mins to an hr after she blogs, there's never a shortage of whales on those. It's amazing how many people do the same.
I agree with iamnotback that it's hard to form a community when whale votes are the only ones that really count. Every other vote is almost negligible
Yes but it's just starting to get traction. One month ago he got 0 vests. Now he has 10m vests. In 6 months he might be at 100mn vests. It's a process of whale-building as coins are also given to the bottom.
Exactly and as she gains traction voting 30+ minutes won't work. You will have to vote earlier to get anything at all, curation rewards end up reduced, and she is rewarded a bit more (up to 33%) for her consistency and reputation. There is no real value in "curating" someone who has already established herself as providing consistently good posts.
That's exactly the intent. It's individually milking, yes, but the auction means these rewards are transferred to the author. Once there is less curation decision to be made (because the answer is 70-90% predetermined) then there is little curation reward.
Dan's posts pay about 5% of the normal curation reward. Anonymint's posts pay more, but still less than the full reward that votes on a complete unknown would get. Seems about right to me.
Dan's posts pay about 5% of the normal curation reward. Anonymint's posts pay more, but still less than the full reward that votes on a complete unknown would get. Seems about right to me.
I'm seeing Dan having second thoughts on curation rewards though...
Sure, there are other issues with it, but this isn't one of them.
I mean, let's say I know you are going to vote anonymint with 80% chance, then my risk is too low. He'll get my upvote quickly to front-run "smooth the whale". Now repeat this with every other whale and their favorite authors, or even comment authors, and you are suddenly milking the curation through automation via a robotic circle-jerk. Humans are pretty "low entropy" in their behavior and it's not gonna get better anytime soon.
Having said that, we are far from being in a totally broken system.
This is why I vote people like heiditravels 30mins to an hr after she blogs, there's never a shortage of whales on those. It's amazing how many people do the same.
I agree with iamnotback that it's hard to form a community when whale votes are the only ones that really count. Every other vote is almost negligible
Yes but it's just starting to get traction. One month ago he got 0 vests. Now he has 10m vests. In 6 months he might be at 100mn vests. It's a process of whale-building as coins are also given to the bottom.
That's exactly the intent. It's individually milking, yes, but the auction means these rewards are transferred to the author. Once there is less curation decision to be made (because the answer is 70-90% predetermined) then there is little curation reward.
Dan's posts pay about 5% of the normal curation reward. Anonymint's posts pay more, but still less than the full reward that votes on a complete unknown would get. Seems about right to me.
Dan's posts pay about 5% of the normal curation reward. Anonymint's posts pay more, but still less than the full reward that votes on a complete unknown would get. Seems about right to me.
I'm seeing Dan having second thoughts on curation rewards though...