Topic: Your prayers are answered, first STEEM fork arrives, how high will it go? (Read 2034 times)

the entire point is to distribute the currency to as many people as possible who would engage in commerce with the token, because that is the only future that will make the token valuable.

Like the asshole decision not to release a Windows binary of steemd = massive, deliberate security hole...
How much money can one put in an account secured ONLY by an unregulated, centralized web site targeted by every hacket out there?

Steemit...They basically lost me when Dan posted his insane plan to have a "whale curation bot arms race"...
And force people to read only garbage dictated by bots in a 30 minute window...
If I see another "Steem changed my life" or "here's more pics no one cares about" I'm gonna hurl.

and get the feeling of ownership back!

...

I am thinking there is a very easy way to determine if Steem or any competitor such as Peerplays is failing.

As @xtester wrote in his most recent blog, it is all about the rate of growth. Which is what I've been saying.

Seems Steem signups are averaging in the rough neighborhood of 1000 per day and are not increasing. Of these, about 80+% become inactive within 30 days or less (xtester claims 66% but I think he is fooled by a recent reacceleration of signups and my prior calculations showed 80+%).

So with actually about 200 signups per day, that is ... drumroll please ... a humongous 73,000 active users after 1 year.

And we don't know how many of those are bots. And we don't know how many of those will quit within a year.

73,000 users is freckle on an elephants ass when we are talking about the economies-of-scale in networking that are necessary to make a social network (and merchant) ecosystem viable.

Even if we increase that by an order-of-magnitude, at 730,000 users in one year, it is still at least an order-of-magnitude insufficient.

There is a deeper point. The Steem adoption rate numbers are indicative of lack of viral spread. The signups are merely barely replacing attrition. Intuitively I am nearly certain that the reason is because there is no compelling networking of the reason to signup.

Try to understand the reason people signed up for other social networks. It was because they did something very unique and in high demand. So when all your friends were joining, you caved in and joined too.

Steem has none of those attributes. It doesn't do something very unique that is in high demand. And not all of my friends are joining. The reason is because most people don't give a fuck about storage persistance and censorship resistance, and blogging to earn $ is not something most people can do well (and besides it is not immediately gratification and requires a lot of work, both of which are things the masses hate).

Sorry you need a new formula and Peerplays can repeat this same mistake but it won't cross the chasm.

I have a plan and a design and now I've chosen a 5 letter, one syllable name.

I am thinking there is a very easy way to determine if Steem or any competitor such as Peerplays is failing.

As @xtester wrote in his most recent blog, it is all about the rate of growth. Which is what I've been saying.

Seems Steem signups are averaging in the rough neighborhood of 1000 per day and are not increasing. Of these, about 80+% become inactive within 30 days or less (xtester claims 66% but I think he is fooled by a recent reacceleration of signups and my prior calculations showed 80+%).

So with actually about 200 signups per day, that is ... drumroll please ... a humongous 73,000 active users after 1 year.

And we don't know how many of those are bots. And we don't know how many of those will quit within a year.

73,000 users is freckle on an elephants ass when we are talking about the economies-of-scale in networking that are necessary to make a social network (and merchant) ecosystem viable.

Even if we increase that by an order-of-magnitude, at 730,000 users in one year, it is still at least an order-of-magnitude insufficient.

There is a deeper point. The Steem adoption rate numbers are indicative of lack of viral spread. The signups are merely barely replacing attrition. Intuitively I am nearly certain that the reason is because there is no compelling networking of the reason to signup.

Try to understand the reason people signed up for other social networks. It was because they did something very unique and in high demand. So when all your friends were joining, you caved in and joined too.

Steem has none of those attributes. It doesn't do something very unique that is in high demand. And not all of my friends are joining. The reason is because most people don't give a fuck about storage persistance and censorship resistance, and blogging to earn $ is not something most people can do well (and besides it is not immediately gratification and requires a lot of work, both of which are things the masses hate).

Sorry you need a new formula and Peerplays can repeat this same mistake but it won't cross the chasm.

I have a plan and a design and now I've chosen a 5 letter, one syllable name.