Topic: Steemit how can this thing be workable long term? - page 13. (Read 32368 times)

But in the wrong place. Should be on the posts, not only on users Post profile.

The search function and follow/mute button have always been there, but they don't work yet.

A lot of people have been requesting them for a while now Anonymint- not just you.

Date tonight... adios

Appears the buttons don't do anything yet. So appears to be a quick hack.


A non-failure versus a failure would be a bad idea?

There is no funding model in Steemit that can work. Dan can build all the market places he want, but no one will buy STEEM to go use his market places, because those same merchants (or similar products) will also sell for fiat and BTC else where. Steemians will power down STEEM POWER to STEEM and use his market places sometimes, but the other times they will cash out. There won't be a net incoming demand for STEEM other than from speculators. But speculators don't keep coming in forever. The price can't go to infinity. Thus the cost of funding the bloggers will come from those who trade more often, or everyone powers up so it is paid by all investors. So why invest if there is no great transactional utility for the STEEM token and the cost of paying bloggers comes out of the investors pocket?

It is very difficult to create exclusive demand for a CC token. Bitcoin locked up large wire transfers and avoiding the banks' paperwork requirements. No one will have a reason to go buy STEEM to go make a transaction. No one has an incentive to buy STEEM to gain more voting power, because the whales drive the voting and you'd be crazy to invest $millions and lock it up for 2 years.

Subtle.

Personally, I think a fork would be a bad idea, unless it's motivated by user requests. My scenario would be cam girls being blocked from the site, along with a few others considered morally dubious, so a fork would be a natural progression based on a natural need that serves both party's agenda.

*not casting cam girls as morally dubious--a girl has to eat.

They might be trying to say, "you have no fucking chance if you try to compete and fork".

Edit: steemit.com won't load for me right now.

I saw it, was thinking, "Damn, they're fast!"

Mute button will be useful for trolls and such.

They are reading my criticisms like a hawk then. See my upthread post about lack of a Follow button.

Try to find anyone else calling for that. I hadn't seen it.

Looks like a new search function got added (might have missed earlier, not sure) and a follow button--now I can follow Shelby, smooth and few others without running all over the site.

Has anyone thought about the implications for monetizing constructive criticism yet?

I helped jl777 just a little bit on his upcoming DEX work. I also came up with a way to improve further on what I had suggested to TierNolan and jl777 in the "cut and choose" thread. These are true DEX where you trade CCs for CCs, not pegged assets representing them.

My understanding is that Dan's Open Ledger is not a DEX. You can only convert pegged assets on the blockchain, then you need to use some centralized or federated entities to get the actual CCs in and out of the Open Ledger system

Nevertheless, I think DEX is not that needed yet when you can trade CCs for CCs quickly using ShapeShift or Poloniex and withdraw quickly avoided most risk of defunct exchange. Traders who maintain a balance, need high liquidity of centralized exchanges.

I'd still like to have the true form of DEX.


I also see maybe that potential but not with Streem's current design. They got some things correct but IMO some things are very wrong.

The single biggest problem which can't be fixed in Steem is that everyone will have a motivation to cash out to a better unit-of-exchange eventually, because there is no way to force any merchants to accept only STEEM tokens. Thus there will be no demand for STEEM from the outside. Thus no way to fund paying for the content that doesn't debase the investors.

I see a potential solution to that, but (I realized a few hours ago) it requires that no tokens are given to free signups. Steem can no longer do that because they promised the 57 million coins to new signups. This has stopped me dead in the water and I can't move forward on improving Steem unless I can find another solution (doubtful and looks very bleak).


There isn't enough profit per user to make it worth it for users, unless only some superstar users get it all.

The business model of Steemit is not what you think. It was never to make blogging a lucrative endeavor for most users. It was to entice a million users to signup and then to sell CC commerce to them. But the plan is deeply flawed for the reason I stated.


Users of social networks get paid in terms of their social rewards, not monetary.

To build better social networks is about enabling them to better leverage the social rewards (which btw can include helping them upsell things to their fans which is monetary but not the normal profit of a social network).


As I said, you have some valid reasons.



Yes I see their coding (and even some design) talent.

But somehow Dan always messes up the key salient parts that make or break the project. How is that he always does that? Seems to me to be habitual.

As you imply (which is correct), my habitual issue is I don't code regularly any more. The reason is well known. I am not 100% healthy. (I may be healthy enough now to ramp another serious coding phase, but I've said that before in recent times)


Sounds exactly like a description of myself before I got old and ill. (I think the issue is mostly ill, not old but I am not sure as I was never old and not ill).


What happened? I thought he was in control? Did he not have the most stake?

DPoS governance turned into a clusterfuck right?



Seems likely unless something else steals its market and/or it implodes.


Lots of arguments in crypto. I don't have the answer on how to prevent them.

I think that 3.86 USD per coin is expensive atm, but maybe I'm wrong. Following...

Yes that is possible but the cost is insecurity, so I don't know how they could decide to do that, unless they didn't understand the near certain outcome of being hacked.

As I said, if the social network will store a private hash exclusively for the app on the users' account, then it can be solved and maintain decentralization (with the servers of the social networks as the vulnerability). I haven't checked yet whether that is possible.

I think they did that with the intention of making Steemit.com open source eventually and allowing people to host alternatives.

That won't fix the case that my suggestion would fix:

https://steemit.com/hiking/@katecloud/what-i-m-taking-to-survie-a-6-month-hiking-trip


Thanks! You'll really keep up with a lot of information.

That indicates Steemit's developers were virgins and didn't understand website security very well (although they may be learning now).

I would have known not to do that, as I explained in my post to which you are replying.

You can't edit posts after 24 hours.

Passwords are hashed and stored on the blockchain: https://steemit.com/steem/@robinhood/offline-attack-on-steem-user-credentials

Note I thought of a solution for hacker defacing posts, which is to not allow very significant post edits after post has garnished significant votes/payout.

Also I think the use of external social network login accounts to protect against hackers is acceptable if either the social network can store a random hash in private for our app and/or if we give up decentralization of login as per the second case below.

smooth do you know if they are storing the hash of the user's login password on the blockchain? Or are they just storing the private keys only on the blockchain, then storing the hash of the login password only on the Streemit.com servers?

The reason I ask is because if they're doing the former, that would be very insecure because the attacker could use a dictionary attack, because they can't rate limit hacker's trials if the hash is public.

Yesterday I wrote why the benchmark isn't reddit's value, but the combined market of reddit+forums+blogs - as steemit appeals to all these demographics: https://steemit.com/steemit/@alexgr/market-value-of-steem-can-become-much-higher-than-reddit-here-is-why

Yet, if we can't get new signups that will be kind of difficult

But yes, I'd think it's probably to be safer with new signups. If you have thousands of hack victims, they'll be unable to support them.

I didn't get that impression. You have some valid reasons to think what you do. I will reply more after I eat.

Is the price down because they closed new signups?

https://steemit.com/steemit/@noodhoog/steemit-a-victim-of-its-own-success-signups-are-closed

I bet they want to fix security before allowing more signups?

The code may not be forkable due to the license, but you could fork the idea.

I receive little to no love from Dan and company. I would say far too little for the hours I have spent defending them and their projects. I am not even sure he is aware that I do so, as he does not come on Bitcointalk.

I supported BTS because I think decentralized exchanges are needed. Gox, Cryptsy, Mintsy, the list of exchange defaults will continue to grow. The community just doesn't yet realize how bad a decentralized solution is needed. I would like to think that I am more forward thinking than most, and I thought people would eventually realize decentralized solutions are ideal and Bitshares would eventually be a big success. I'm still not convinced that won't happen some day. Bitshares was the first DEX-centric cryptocurrency project, and I support any cryptocurrency project aiming at solving this problem. BTCD's PAX has promise, as does SUPERNET and B&C Exchange. I will support those projects just as much, but they are all mostly vaporware, and for some reason those projects aren't trolled as much as Bitshares so there is never really a need for me to come to their defense.

I support STEEM because it is different from other cryptocurrencies with the social networking angle. It has a chance to be reach the masses more so than any other cryptocurrency. It also solves a problem that I have always thought needed solving... kicking back profits of social media web sites to the users that make them so valuable. Legacy social networks are like sweat shops, but worse considering they don't provide their users with any wages at all. There may be better social networking cryptocurrency designs, but I don't trust that they will be implemented in a sufficient amount of time... they are vaporware. Until they are actually released, I will continue to champion Steemit. Which brings me to my next point...

Dan can actually deliver working cryptocurrencies which are mostly as advertised in the road map or whitepaper. There are way too many projects to name that are perpetual vaporware. Dan has a good team that helps him too. SVK, in my opinion, can make some of the best looking modern user interfaces I have used in crypto.

Dan is also a creative and hardworking guy, as evidenced by his Github account. He is never happy with the way his project exists. He is always scheming up some way to improve them, and as I said a moment ago... he can actually deliver on the improvements and get them into a release. He always seems to come up with some good ideas as to what direction the project should go. He is dedicated to improving his projects, as evidenced by how much Bitshares improved from 0.xx releases to the Graphene release. The only reason why he left Bitshares was because the Bitshares stakeholders didn't want to fund his development efforts any more. Mainly the Chinese stakeholders were very vocal about that. I am sure he will continue working on Steemit for years to come. He is at least invested for 2 years, so I expect to see a lot of improvements during that time frame.

At the same time, I was very critical of Bitshares within the Bitshares community. There were a lot of people that don't like me over there because I was always speaking my mind, a lot of the time going against the grain of whatever groupthink was popular at the time. I defend him and his projects on here because he doesn't come here to defend himself. Which is probably a good thing, because otherwise he wouldn't be able to get much work done. I realize this post sounds obsessive or brown noseyish, but you asked why and I have now told you. I don't really care what people think about me. I honestly think he is one of the best developers in the cryptocurrency industry.