Topic: Steemit.com: Blogging is the new Mining - page 113. (Read 348532 times)

Idea for steemit flags:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@sparkeddev/steemit-flag-accountability-system-idea

I also Made a steemit discord channel:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@sparkeddev/steemit-discord-channel

Wonder how you managed to draw MACD on Poloniex daily chart 

But even at Bittrex daily there's no definite MACD signal to buy yet, should wait another couple of days 

I think Steem will move UP hardly on poloniex today....
Look on 1day MACD, today should be the moon 

I was speculating.

It didn't let me vote with my newly mined account until I had mined a couple more blocks and had 3 SP. It was a hassle figuring out how to give my newly created account a posting key.
BTW, love the other aspect of the hardfork. I'm mining a lot more blocks now.

Here's a post I think you'll enjoy.

Life is a game. This is your strategy guide: https://steemit.com/life/@xtester/inviting-a-world-class-writer-to-steemit-life-is-a-game-this-is-your-strategy-guide

Correct. It isn't even something you could ever do via the web GUI. Only with CLI/API. Normal users are not affected at all by this change.

It's not STEAM 

In effect nothing changed for new singups. Their vote is the same. The change only affects "hackers" who were splitting the small vote in parts.

i guess im a bit confused to how complete new commers will get curator reward now

The effect of this is that low-SP users can't reduce their vote weight from the default, but even minimum-balance accounts can still vote with the default weight. The change was made because some attacker was using cheap accounts with low-weight votes to spam the blockchain. That is now prevented.

SHAPESHIFT added STEAM for exchange

Charlie Shrem (https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/yankee-bitinstant-21181) is now on steemit as well. He is using name charlieshrem.

I don't think that the 50M are about vests, most probable to be something like "vote_shares"

If you scroll down a bit here https://steemd.com/steemit/@teatree/curation-payout-on-steemit-now-has-a-minimum-vote-weight you will find your post with your vote having a "weight" of 52 billion "vote_shares"

I came across the following article which says there is a minimum vote weight for payouts.

https://steemit.com/steemit/@teatree/curation-payout-on-steemit-now-has-a-minimum-vote-weight

Is this true, and how does it work - the links in the article don't really give much information. Do you need 50 million vests per vote, or 50 million in total from all the votes?

Anyone have any idea?

For me, this was the greatest part of the launch. It was not some easy clone that I could just click the mouse a few times and instamine the fuck out of it. It was like a puzzle. After I figured out the mining, I tried to help others get started, but even with detailed step-by-step guide, most could not get going. Hindsight, I wish I had rented tons more servers, and kept them running until the end. But, like you said:

On the first day(after re-launch) I was pretty sure it was a quick scam. I should have known better after digging through the code, but in the cesspool that is the ALT ANN section of BitcoinTalk, you can never be too careful.

I write this post to address a quote within the Coin Telegraph story "Legitimacy of Crytpoassets or App Coins, Their Real World Value" by Joseph Young (https://cointelegraph.com/news/legitimacy-of-cryptoassets-or-app-coins-their-real-world-value).

Within the article, this quote is misattributed to bitcointalk user cryptohunter. This quote is actually mine, posted as user Eclipse Crypto, and quoted in its entirety at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14404632. I am not the only Eclipse Crypto dev. I simply happened to be logged into the developer account when I started mining Steem, and never logged out, much to the eventual dismay of other developers on the Eclipse project. I deleted the original quote at the request of the Steem developers, although I knew copies persisted as quotes by other users.

The reason I deleted the original post from which Coin Telegraph took this quote is that I eventually felt that the rant was unfair. First, being used to so many launch shenanigans from other coins, I, like most other miners, am quick to throw around the word "scam". Given that Steem has been good for early miners and early exchange buyers, this label does not fit. The developers are still around, fully support Steem, and do very little selling of their coins from early mining, relatively speaking. Any selling that they do seems reasonable, given the scope of the Steem project and the size of the Steem markets on Bittrex and Poloniex. Additionally, the Steem developers have created and fully support the steemit.com website. Moreover, they have fully compensated users who lost funds during a limited site compromise in July. In short, no coin that has the benefit of support from a such an experienced and dedicated team could be a "scam". Time reveals whether projects fit this label, and I believe, along with many other users, that the label does not fit Steem.

My quote also claims the developers gave poor mining instructions. This was indeed the case for the original launch. Most of the instructions were accurate, but one in particular was not. It had to do with the format for the account name when issuing the mining command. Although explaining their error would require getting into the minutiae of JSON and command line parsers, this error turned out to be an honest mistake. Indeed, this mistake was corrected in the instructions for relaunch, and many clarifying instructions were added, making it less difficult (though not easy per se) for those who mined the relaunch.

Finally, as explained to me by the developers, the approximately 100 different accounts were required because their plan was to dominate the mining pool. Their intent was not to hide their mining presence, but to have enough accounts to accommodate their large hashing power. Steem uses a queued miner system, and each account may exist in the queue only as a single instance. Because the mining queue is generally about 100 in length, the 100 different addresses were reasonable to fully prevent wasted hashes. Several users, including myself, complained about the numerous accounts for the first launch. In response, the development team used very generic names, like steemit01, steemit02, etc., for the re-launch so that the team would not squat on good account names, many of which I claimed during subsequent mining.

In closing, I hope this puts the quote in context and clears up any misconceptions that reproducing it could propagate.

You have many places to buy/sell Steem & Steem Dollars https://steemit.com/steem/@karoline/steem-and-steem-dollar-exchanges#

Are you uploading images with a directl link or via steemimg or anything similar.

It could be that the image itself has a border, then you need to cut it on any programm on your pc.

Here's my latest analysis of Steemit: Measuring Steemit Growth: What Every Investor, Developer And User Should Know

"1. Transactions Volume: has experienced a significant growth since 4th of July and has reached a healthy state where on most days we see on average more than 100,000 transactions per day. By contrast, Bitcoin has on average more than 200,000 per day, and Ethereum less than 50,000.

2. Registered Accounts: presently Steemit has passed 60,500 registered accounts and has grown with ~17,500 new accounts or ~40,5% during the last 14 days. That’s 1250 new accounts or ~2,9% per day. As it stands now, we could reach ~75,000 – 80,000 registered accounts by the end of August.

3. Community dynamics: the community is growing and evolving at a rapid pace. Indeed, people seem to be very adaptive and strive to understand, contribute and improve things as much as possible. There are also disagreements and some apparent conflicts of interest between some well known community members(whales), but things are moving forward.  Indeed, I have not seen in crypto a community as diverse as this one. In fact, I am quite impressed at the rapidly growing number of well-connected influencers which have jumped in. As @roelandp put it, you’ve got Playmates, Vigilantes, Pirates and many others with hundreds of thousands of followers. Try to imagine what will follow.

4. Ecosystem/exchanges/developers: The ecosystem is also booming. Indeed, if you look at steemtools.com you can see that we have already 59(!) listed tools and apps. Number of exchanges has also increased. Although Poloniex and Bittrex were there, you can see that another three have listed Steem: Livecoin, HitBTC and alcurEX.

What’s even more intriguing is how involved various community developers are. And yes, the number is growing. Indeed, this seems to be at least in part due to the direct and immediate rewards they receive after implementing a solution to one of the many community needs. As things stand, this may be one of the most interesting platforms developers should engage. The reason is simple and potent: incentives. They’ve got both healthy immediate rewards, and promising future prospects if Steemit succeeds.

5. Investors, VCs, Startup Founders: another important metric to consider is what some of the bright minds of Sillicon Valley tend to think about the platform. Why? Well, because a good word from some of these people can add a lot of value and credibility to a very early stage platform and so significantly increase its exposure. Indeed, this kind of exposure is like gold, since it not only exposes Steemit to people who would merely love it if they would hear about it, but exposes it to other investors, VC’s or startup founders which could add significant value to the platform if they would join. Among these kind of people you have Fred Wilson, top Sillicon Valley investor, who is rooting for Steemit, Fred Ehrsam, Co-founder of Coinbase, mentioning it in his essay, Albert Wenger, early stage VC, mentioning it in his essay and many other startup founders who have already joined the platform."