Steemians are realizing I was correct: The meaning of downvote has to change to "I don't want to read content and ensuring discussion like this". It needs to be a personal relevance tool, not a globalized ranking. I am working on this change. There's a great short story in James Joyce's Dubliners in which a man outlines his life in comparison to an old acquaintance he's recently met again. The man looks at his life: his family and work and enviously compares it to his acquaintance's writing success. The irony is that if the man had laid out his life honestly (as Joyce did in the story) he would have had a literary success--at least with that story (@highlite, I hope saw that effect of with result of his post). I'm sure the voting system can be tweaked for better outcomes for the site and user, I don't think it will be a one-size-fits-all solution--unless it allows for a more user defined experience. |
|
|
|
|
Getting back to why a vendor or purchaser would use steem over amazon.
Other than the efficiency issues of globalized banking markets--we have amazon's manipulation of purchase to consider. Let's say that I want a copy of Bruce Lee's teachings on martial arts, I go to amazon, search and get results (they're of course skewed towards buying from amazon rather than a vendor and entice you with free shipping), of course this free shipping starts at a $25, but when I go to buy something else I get the $49 and up choices, so fuck it, I'm buying a used copy at a higher price with a shipping delay from a private vender?
I did--but I can wait, don't care that it's used, and have no problem paying a few bucks for what I want and not the additional crap amazon is pushing.
|
|
|
|
Are the top SP accounts actively curating a lot of articles (shooting hundreds of upvotes per day) or are we just theorizing that they are?
Dozens could influence the type of materials people chase in writing and in curating rewards--on the flip side of that, do rewards get dissipated enough to where minnows are determining the content? Yes, with enough time, they should--but if you look at Shelby's stats (and yes, that prompted my 3 cent strategy critique) you'll see that those social networks took two years of flat growth before they got rolling (his observation was the trajectory is weird--though steemit might be a black swan and no one will see what's coming--note instagram's an exception in his chart). ATM: in an election year, the obvious liberal money is pushing a very motivated and very wealthy sector out of the conversation (if I don't see NRA, right-to-life, or build a wall posts, I know that the discussion is lopsided and I know that the guys running the show are missing the dollars these debates create (or am I the only one who gets how politics motivates action?). It's "divide and conquer," not "put up a divider and try to win Hillary an election." |
|
|
|
Investors should not be curators! That is bullshit. Yes they have a vested interest to want good content, but that doesn't mean they are expert curators. Maximum divison-of-labor is inexorable. (Imagine if my gf and her friends have absolutely nothing in common with the 50 whales of Steem)
It kinda makes sense when you take into account that proof of stake is inherently just a company issuing private shares of itself, so that voting dynamic just mirrors the function of proof of stake where whale takes all. I think the problem shelby is identifying is that without some distance from the process, the investors influence the direction politically and socially, and while they may have good intentions, they may come out as the reverse fox news of social media, but with travel blobs and tech write ups as social content. Editors and moderators, who get fair and equal time, can't come fast enough--and the whales should hand them the reigns in the form of meaningful voting power. |
|
|
|
I'm not sure what Parker's servers are. Google suggested it has something to do with Minecraft, which I've never followed. Maybe you can elaborate and we can consider what lessons might be learned. We talked a bit about the issue of attacks against witnesses within the past few pages.
Sean Parker, but reading Shelby's latest, I kind of want to reference Leroy Jenkins (tomorrow maybe I can nail the fundamental strategy issues and make it more palatable. @Shelby, can I reference your stat post in the revision? I think that perspective is an eye opener and shouldn't be ignored. |
|
|
|
SteemServices is not "official" it is a consortium of a few whales (not me) who do marketing and provide other supporting services for the platform. That's a pretty good number of followers for them at half the official twitter. I doubt they literally bought them but they may have run some sort of promotion to encourage it, I don't remember.
*fixed As far as the witnesses go, is that equivalent to Parker's servers? Or can they adapt in crisis? |
|
|
|
As far as interest versus numbers, does anyone have any numbers for Linkedin and twitter? These could give you a gauge into media and corporate interest. I'll put the current numbers here in case there is no alexa-like stat-machine: (assuming these pages are official) https://www.linkedin.com/company/steemit -- 115 (followers) https://twitter.com/Steemit -- 1570 (seem to remember this a few hundred lower a week or so ago, but memory is well-known as a flawed content aggregate....) |
|
|
|
U guys are getting really cryptic.
I speculate bananas
A banana would fit |
|
|
|
the problem with clones was that most of the times clones was ready to scam , now days some original coins scaming instantly and you have nothing to wait from a clone , well expect some hype!
http://www.resistors-and-diodes-and-picchips-oh-my.co.uk/?p=1210I think the decentralization=scam argument failed when it hit mass market, so they only needed to package it to the tastes of the market, not the taste of standard purveyors--good enough trumps--inflated price--yet quality concerns remain. The product needs to be resilient, the interface simple, and costs minimal. Whoever does that, wins. *Was looking for the French pronunciation of ingénue and found : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingenu38+20=130 That's efficiency. My guess is this network thrives with resistance to tampering and leveraging a world distribution of content at ever lowering costs, until a base forms and liquidity trickles in. That's it--if you're looking for word count and fancy euphemisms, then you missed the point of capitalism--efficiency equals time ....and everyone wants more. /end |
|
|
|
Here is the proposed definition (and instruction to voters) of the meaning of an upvote and downvote for the project Webrary (intended to be an improvement over Steem) I am now developing. I want to vet this with y'all, since I am designing the internal algorithms around these. Note Webrary won't be the final name, but I can't mention the final one since don't own the .com domain yet. Like Steem/Steemit there will be separate names for the blockchain/UI respectively. The former name is similar to Webrary, and the latter one is more catchy and has more mass appeal than Steemit.
Voting is the way you control the rankings of the future content you will see. An upvote or downvote is not a weapon to express agreement nor disagreement, nor to judge the value of the content to the overall project. Rather it should reflect whether you personally want to continue to be exposed to content (and the community it engenders) similar to this example. An upvote or downvote will not cause the ranking of the content to change for voters who disagree with your content preferences. If you vote for political objectives intending to suppress or enhance visibility of the content for others and not for your preferences, then the type of content visible to you will become a groupthink monotone that fools you into believing everyone agrees with you, while others who disagree with you will continue to see the diversity of content that interests them. Indecision on your part should be reflected in a non-vote. Unlike Steem, voting remains open indefinitely and there is no curation penalty for voting later, so you can vote later once you've made up your mind.
I like your thinking on upvotes (less trying to game the system and more inviting future content for ease of use). |
|
|
|
Special thanks to smooth, risto, fluffypony and Shelby. Thank you guys, didn't plan on joining the cc community, but people like yourself is why I stay (please don't take that as sentimental and sappy--IE awkward). https://steemit.com/poetry/@generalizethis/meltdown-part-1(Not sure if the last DNA-swirl section being off center was my subconscious forcing people to goto the recording to hear it read [they should] or just my computer's way of saying, "you know I can't let you do that") |
|
|
|
Hard to feel bad about you if you lose money in Steem.. it is like the 99149123491239412th get rich quick scheme in crypto, it is useless from a blockchain technology point of view and it offers really zero value to anything. The structure is wrong on many levels but lets leave it at that.
And you know, you see this coin go to $x00 mcap but know it is only insiders who is making cake. The distribution is bad and for the ordinary investor the value proposition is terrible. And you guys don't try to say I am trying to buy cheap or something like that. Steem is in the same boat as onecoin for me. They really offered investors a crappy deal to be followed by dilution by creators and friends and the people thinking they will cash out huge amounts from shitposting well good luck with that.
Disagree, this is the one coin that people outside the cryptosphere are interested in hearing about. There's a value in that--does it transfer to sticky roots and a liquid investment of capital? That's the trillion dollar question-- |
|
|
|
Im sure if you investigate inside the actual blockchain you will find some interesting info.
Why don't you do that and come back with your findings-- |
|
|
|
It will be one less hoop for the consumer to jump through (cc, paypal) and AFAIK amazon isn't a good fit for all retailers (not sure why you mentioned it won't be in lieu of everywhere else--who would assume that?).
I don't understand why buying products online with cc, paypal is any more of a hoop to jump through than buying with Steem. If you mean that the payer already has some Steem, then I can say they already have some fiat in their credit card also. My point is that unless you are selling some product which is targeting only to Steem users (e.g. the Steemit T-shirts), then there is no advantage to adding Steemit's miniscule share of the online market to your set of payment options as a seller online. You should add Bitcoin first, as it has two orders of magnitude more users. When I say extra step, I mean signing-in. If I'm already on a social site and see something I want and can buy it right then without having to chose a payment option, that's less steps--seconds perhaps, but everyone is trying to eek out every second they can. Also, for retailers, it should be cheaper as there aren't any chargebacks or international fees to leverage on retailers by steemit--though steem dollars need to be consistent with the dollar for this to make sense. Agreed if they amass a large enough ecosystem. Otherwise there aren't the economies-of-scale to make it more convenient often enough to make it worth the proliferation of ways to pay. As I said, when they approach 100 million users, yes indeed! But IMO I don't think they can get there. Have no idea--right now it seems like a bunch of zombies with game-addled brains mumbling, "Whales" as they wade through a morass of tits, bad poetry, and travel blogs--the one saving grace is the tech and finance sections, let's hope the rest catch up. I still spend more time here as there's at least a chance of an interesting discussion. |
|
|
|
It will be one less hoop for the consumer to jump through (cc, paypal) and AFAIK amazon isn't a good fit for all retailers (not sure why you mentioned it won't be in lieu of everywhere else--who would assume that?).
I don't understand why buying products online with cc, paypal is any more of a hoop to jump through than buying with Steem. If you mean that the payer already has some Steem, then I can say they already have some fiat in their credit card also. My point is that unless you are selling some product which is targeting only to Steem users (e.g. the Steemit T-shirts), then there is no advantage to adding Steemit's miniscule share of the online market to your set of payment options as a seller online. You should add Bitcoin first, as it has two orders of magnitude more users. When I say extra step, I mean signing-in. If I'm already on a social site and see something I want and can buy it right then without having to chose a payment option, that's less steps--seconds perhaps, but everyone is trying to eek out every second they can. Also, for retailers, it should be cheaper as there aren't any chargebacks or international fees to leverage on retailers by steemit--though steem dollars need to be consistent with the dollar for this to make sense. |
|
|
|
The other thing I'm watching is whether any small retailers use steemit as a store front so they can compete with amazon's ease of use--have yet to see it.
Can you give me some of what you are smoking? No chance in hell of what you are fantasizing about. I forget the name, but you can order in on Alpha Bay. Anyways, I didn't that it would happen only that I was watching for it--and it does make sense for small retailers--though it depends on steemit's growth, which depends on managements ability to groom stable communities within the platform--which doesn't seem to be happening (though it still could). How does it make sense for small retailers of any significance to target a userbase of less than 100 million users instead of Amazon as you indicated? You know that Amazon allows small retailers to sell on Amazon. I could see some retailers offering products in exchange for Steem tokens when the active userbase reaches a million users, but this won't be lieu of selling every where else also. As for the vaporware microtransactions ecosystem, we will see if it is every developed. It will be one less hoop for the consumer to jump through (cc, paypal) and AFAIK amazon isn't a good fit for all retailers (not sure why you mentioned it won't be in lieu of everywhere else--who would assume that?). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
