Topic: Steem pyramid scheme revealed - page 64. (Read 107058 times)

Why would comments (and votes if you are referring to reducing data bloat) get pruned. Everything that is published is to be retained forever. There is important information in comments as well.

Who will decide which comments are important and which can be deleted. You come full circle back to the censorship problem again.

I am confident you have access to a dictionary, so your bolded phrase (emphasis added by myself) is inapplicable.


I was referring to IDEALS to shoot for (not a guarantee those IDEALS can be achieved in every case) and my points there were more focused on not forking w.r.t. to reverting history especially money matters such as the rearranging the balances of a crypto-currency. The ALL CAPS word "IDEALS" is the first word in the subject of that thread.

Complex voting and content publishing on-the-blockchain game theory wasn't even in my mind when I started the above linked thread.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=naive&allowed_in_frame=0

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=fool&allowed_in_frame=0

Words have interesting roots.

You know as well as I do that the Larimer Gang and their associates don't care about long-term sustainability.  They only care about creating a short-term cash cow to enrich themselves at the expense of the naive who fall for their schemes.

Never underestimate the Larimer.  He probably already knows this and will just do it after he already on-boards all the users.  He probably knew it was a hard sell to do it in the beginning.  This is not a problem you solve resource free.

The only problem i see in a fee to post is that it might be a too great hurdle for newcomers except you give out free money on signup - but that again would help and not fight spammers (atleast initialy).

Yea, as I had already stated on my reply in that thread, someone has to bear the cost of all these actions, so posting a main topic should likely require a fee, while comments don't, but comments get culled/pruned off the chain eventually.  I think Anonymint has painted himself into a corner here with the whole "you can never fork the chain" mentality.  If he actually attempts to create some social network coin like this, he's going to forget to cover numerous variables like the example I just stated.  He'll then end up forking probably dozens of times to fix them.  Or you'd just have to sit back and observe Steem for something like a year to see what works, but by that time, Larimer might have already forked Steem 9000 times into something that works good.

Just prune the blockchain from comments/blogpost with less then x upvotes or something similar.
Imo you want to only keep the things of interest anyway.

The answer might not be as obvious as you think:

https://steemit.com/steemit/@dantheman/notice-to-bot-spammers#@r0achtheunsavory/re-dantheman-notice-to-bot-spammers-20160729t230052764z

What you think is irrelevant of what will really happen, improvement and adaptation are always on the table, too bad you can't see this.


Yes, questions, "answers" and FUD, three completly different things.

Without video KYC, there is no way to stop the identity theft and copyright infringement issues, because there is no way to hold anyone responsible for what they post.

Even if we attain a decentralized, permissionless blockchain, if we have no way to identify posters of content, then it can become illegal to host a full blockchain node because those infringed have to deal with Whac-A-Mole against innumerable Sybils and will instead be forced to petition the government for a complete ban of the blockchain protocol. We have to be able to move the enforcement out to the ends where individual posters can be sued. Once we can identify posters with their national identification (666) number then the government can just eventually turn off their number so they can't post to the Internet any more. I don't really like where this is headed, but I don't see any way around it, the Bible appears to be correct. My hope is that with KYC, the community can develop a self-policing system to blacklist certain repeat offenders (after much careful deliberation), so that it doesn't fall into the lap of the government and 666 number.

Additionally with out video KYC, there is no way to prevent whales from splitting their voting power to avoid any attempt to improve the otherwise what appears to be the insolubly broken voting algorithm by for example penalizing whales for colluding (and other reasons I will not mention because it would reveal some design improvements I am contemplating).

I already explained to everyone (especially smooth) upthread why I think it will not drop. Don't forget the 80% attrition rate and the 59 million tokens held by Steemit Inc. I will not repeat those points again. It is getting redundant.


Dan has had years to develop his blockchain solution. We've got a pretty good idea of what he has come up with and where his design instincts go. Can they invent something better? Can someone else who competes with them? Will the sky fall down tomorrow? Questions. Not answers.

Also don't forget the power+inertia of vested interests.

That is not what I said or implied: I believe a decentralized and uncensored platform would be openbazzar to steemit's amazon (hopefully that can't be misread).

In the rare case that govs go really nuts, voters could vote for other mayors and not themselves, and afaik this 50% you are talking about is going to drop rapidly, so your "arguments" (or should I say FUDs) are not valid.


Let's stay on fact. Upthread smooth and I (and r0ach) discussed the technical reasons why it can't increase. As as for the game theory, you can have the same number of owners (of stake) implementing 1000 servers, it is still three guys in control.