 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »
|
Some people boasted about 10,000 people using Steemit but, judging by the pending payouts, almost all the activity is $0 / "freemium users". Getting a force of 10,000 out is sizeable in the crypto but it makes it nowhere as popular as Bitcointalk dotorg and isn't indicative of viral adoption.
As I've said before - Reddit clones have been tried a dozen times before and none end up viral.
You must be high or retarded if you think the hard data recorded on an immutable block chain is not indicative of viral growth: https://steemle.com/charts.phpThis guys resorts to logical fallacies when he gets owned.  Steemit is 10,000. Even that GetGems stuff, which was a clone of Telegram, had over 300,000+. I've been looking at Alexa Rank and Google Trends, Steemit is nowhere as popular as other Reddit clones like Voat. People will realize shortly there's no people coming onto Steemit (other than crypto regulars and a few friends) and that's when the capitalization will tank.  But the reality is most users earn $0 and apparently abandon the site. This and it will only get worse from there as more and more user pile up. Whole thing is designed to make the rich richer and poor poorer, you can already see patterns forming. Like that girl that post her holiday PART 1, 2, 3,4,5,6.... she is hooked to the steem mafia, everytime she will post new update she ll bank. Same is true for all the old timers, they could post boring stuff they'd still get upvoted . This leaves no space for any newbie to even try his luck. |
|
|
|
Steemit is not intended to be a charity. Create valuable content that people will want to up vote. Don't be a beggar.
Yeah right, pretty much everyone is a beggar on there since everyone expect some money and wouldn't post otherwise. The indian guy did a formal intro like everyone else a week ago but didn't get a penny so he tried harder. I should also remind you that many people don't speak good english. Only boobs and steem praise gets upvoted there. If the community can't even give these kind of person a few dollars its reputation will go downhill. If you don't think that's unfair you are a soulless scumbag |
|
|
|
Another braindead design from the Steem whitepaper: Bandwidth Instead of Micropayment Channels
In our estimate it should be sufficient to measure the average weekly bandwidth usage of users. Every time a user signs a transaction, that transaction is factored into their own individual moving average. Any time a user’s moving average exceeds the current network limit their transaction is delayed until their average falls below the limit.
So users can't do rapid succession of transactions. An entire use case has been eliminated because of Dan's incorrect logic about transaction fees. He'll learn from my white paper when it is published. I am not going to tell him now as he would copy me. What is your project roughly? |
|
|
|
I edited my post on the prior page, because I am nearly certain I have deduced the business model plan for Steem: ...
Edit: I have figured out their business plan. They obviously are hoping that the commerce which must take place in STEEM (not Steem Power) tokens will pay for the costs of rewarding content creation, via the 9X greater debasement of STEEM vs. SP. This is how they hope that investors do not end up paying for the content ongoing. So the income producing model is apparently the commerce they expect to take place on STEEM once they have a large enough userbase who have plenty of Steem Power tokens to cash out every week to STEEM tokens.
The problem I see with this model in addition to the criticism I made above, is that the commerce won't be a large proportion of the Steem Power, because users will prefer to cash out to fiat or Bitcoin because the merchant ecosystem will be too small. Again my point is there is no way Dan can scale the currency to a diverse ecosystem with it being a corporate controlled block chain (DPoS) and where his company controls all the users. Ecosystems need very diverse network effects and unlimited degrees-of-freedom in order to maximize rate of diversification and scaling.
Dude, what exactly do you mean when you say corporate controlled blockchain and that he controls all the users. Can you elaborate on that? What power to they have? Would steem still work if dan an ned were hit by a bus tomorrow? This seem to be genuine cause for concerns indeed. |
|
|
|
I joined Steemit the very first day. I've used it a bit and checked back occassionally since. There are plenty of flaws with Steemit that goes beyond the obvious pumpNdump/pyramid/inflation/whatever you want to call it economic problems.
The problem with a platform like Steemit is it caters to the okayest and the most, not the best. What I mean by this is the way the voting/payment system works, everyone is looking for the most "good" content to upvote, because others will upvote it as well. Tits and walls of text are dominating trending day in and day out. You can read these posts, and many of them are riddled with errors and generally average quality. Why? Because everyone involved is there to make a profit (look at the dozens of monetization guides that get voted to the top). It's not about having something new, thought provoking, or different, it's about circlejerking anything and everything that the community can agree is worthy of votes.
The result is a feedback loop and a subsequent echochamber of the same recycled garbage over and over again under new names. Steemit claims to seek to provide a curated news source. That isn't going to happen because the only things getting votes will be in line with the community's opinions. FFS, look at how every other god damn post is an introduceyourself post. There is no value in this platform other than getting rich off of the efforts of others. It's a top heavy ecosystem and everyone disillusioned with the thought that they can make money are lining the pockets of the dev team and the top posters/botters.
I should have realized that because the more high reputation votes on a post that one votes on, the more curation reward they receive. Thanks. That is the most astute post I've read. Thus as you say, it becomes all about the game and not some other quality of the content, thus the content will become dysfunctional w.r.t. (unrelated) to any criteria other than the game. And this result will apply to their plans for Peertracks also. It won't be about the quality or social diverse matching of the music. It will be about driving pumps to shares. I'm surprised more people haven't already mentioned this. It's already a huge problem with twitter (feeds are universally cluttered by garbage "parody" accounts that just repost the same tweets and videos, regardless of if you follow any of them or not). With a site that rewards users for voting with the majority and hurts them for voting incorrectly, this problem will only be amplified. Even already the content on steemit is incredibly monotone. The trending page can be summed up as guides, "steemit is my lord and savior" circlerjerks, and introduction posts. Sometimes you get crypto personalities who make posts as well, but that's rarer. That's even worse than you think actually cuz most of the steem power supply is in a handful of hands. The natural course of action is that these wealthy and powerfull people would collude with each other to vote between themselves so they can get richer and even more powerfull, no different from the real world. Even governments could buy lots of steem ( thanks to the printing press) and decide what's gets on the front page and what's doesn't. All in the name of decentralization! |
|
|
|
Why the need to dilute the supply of steem power if 9/10 of it are wiped out every 3 year?
Another question. Posts on the steem front page are being rewarded more $ than a week ago due to the steem price rise. It means that the mecanism in place rewards the same amount of steem per posts. This creates a situation where the more content is published the less rewards each posts will get. Wouldn't it be better to reward a certain amount of steem proportionally to the current steem price, so that the higher the price of steem goes the more post can be rewarded instead of the higher each post can get rewarded. Hopefully that make sense lol
The supply of STEEM is diluted to incentivize long term investment. Most Steem is created as SP, rather than liquid Steem. Unfortunately I don't have time to go into it further, but that is the quick and dirty. There are a lot of mechanics at play, but it really is well conceived when you wrap your head around it. Nobody is going to lock their wealth in SP when 9/10th of it is gonna be wiped out to counter high inflation rate, not even a dilution mecansim. I don't have the numbers at hand but say today's ratio of posts getting a reward VS posts getting none is around 10 to 100. Now when millions of users uses the platform the gap will be gigantic with only so much you can pay with a mere 10% inflation. |
|
|
|
How do you know that the exchange rate will adjust accordingly ? It may not, markets don't always act rational, even more so when everyone are told that 9/10 of their wealth will be wiped out
The exchange rate of VESTs to SP is not determined by market forces. It is hard coded to change over time in order to dilute the supply of SP. You can check the current rate at https://steemd.com/distributionCurrently it is Note that what is called SP is simply VEST balance denominated in STEEM equivalents. There are mechanisms in that act as automatic stabilizers in the case of market volatility, by the way... We could eventually discuss those. They're very clever. Why the need to dilute the supply of steem power if 9/10 of it are wiped out every 3 year? Another question. Posts on the steem front page are being rewarded more $ than a week ago due to the steem price rise. It means that the mecanism in place rewards the same amount of steem per posts. This creates a situation where the more content is published the less rewards each posts will get. Wouldn't it be better to reward a certain amount of steem proportionally to the current steem price, so that the higher the price of steem goes the more post can be rewarded instead of the higher each post can get rewarded. Hopefully that make sense lol |
|
|
|
If 1/10 of the supply is being wiped every 3 years then we have a problem cuz SP tokens will only be backed by 0.1 steem.
This seems like a misreading of some aspect of the economics involved. What are you basing this off of? Whitepaper says : In order to compensate for the ever increasing precision, the STEEM network performs a 10:1 “reverse split” every 32,000,000 blocks (about 3 years). When they reached about 5b coins which is about 32 000 000 blocks the split will occur. After that SP tokens will be backed by 0.1 steem since 1/10 have been wiped. There are no 'SP tokens' it is a virtual unit that is derived by multiplying the number of VESTS tokens (largely a hidden token in the system from the perspective of end users) by the exchange rate. When the reverse split happens the exchange rate will be reduced by a factor of 10 to compensate. Nothing will change about SP ownership except the position of the decimal. 1 Steem will still be convertible to 1 SP (and vice versa, allowing for the two-year delay). I need clarification here. If SP tokens are steem tokens why are they not also being reduced 10:1 ? Say after 32 000 000 blocks 5b steem were created. Out of those 5b steem 4b are held as SP tokens and 1b are held as steem token. If you only reduce steem tokens then you would burn 9/10 of 1b. There would still be 4b steem tokens in circulation held in SP tokens. Now if you burn all the tokens as mentionned in the whitepaper ( 5b of them) you also need to burn the SP tokens.. SP will observe the same reverse stock split as Steem. You keep mentioning SP tokens, but that is confused. No such token exists. Your SP balance is the product of your VESTS tokens times the exchange rate. When 90% of the Steem in the vesting fund is destroyed, the exchange rate will adjust accordingly, and so will your SP. How do you know that the exchange rate will adjust accordingly ? It may not, markets don't always act rational, even more so when everyone are told that 9/10 of their wealth will be wiped out |
|
|
|
But that means that every week 1% of the SP is liquid for selling. If no one is converting to SP, then eventually it will all become STEEM which is debased 100% per annum and the curation will be dominated by the few remaining with SP.
It also appears to be a constant selling pressure juxtaposed against any speculation demand for STEEM. Analogous to miners divest BTC.
I see your point that the amount of STEEM available is only 10% of marketcap right now. So that can be another factor for price moving up so much.
Dan planned out the math of this pyramid scheme well. It is a front loaded pump with a long-tail die off.
I'm not saying you don't know what you're talking about, but none of what you just said has any basis in reality. 9 SP are created for every 1 Steem created.Please do your homework before making outlandish claims about pyramid schemes. Indeed on the bolded. Did you not read what I wrote: Dan planned out the math of this pyramid scheme well. It is a front loaded pump with a long-tail die off.
You bolded the fact that disproves the premise of your post... You don't understand my post. Just try to explain what you think was disproven, then I will explain your myopia. SP is created alongside STEEM at a ratio of 9:1. You said if nobody is converting to SP, it will all be STEEM. 90% is bigger than 10%. 90% of the money supply is created as SP. 10% is created as STEEM. More SP is created than STEEM. Get it? SP tokens are locked steem tokens, why do you say that they are seperately created? The 9 extra SP comes from the 100% steem token inflation, there is only one token that is being created which is steem. They are distributed in SP form so they can't be spent asap but they are steem tokens. |
|
|
|
|
Bacchist has a stake, just checked his wallet ROFL not a big one tho
Just a bit more context in the debate.
|
|
|
|
Most people have been powering up their Steem.
What does that mean? It means that well over 90% of the Steem in existence is not currently liquid. Though there is additional liquidity in the form of SBD (Steem Dollars), which are backed by one USD of Steem. Dan planned out the math of this pyramid scheme well. It is a front loaded pump with a long-tail die off. Lol +1 |
|
|
|
If 1/10 of the supply is being wiped every 3 years then we have a problem cuz SP tokens will only be backed by 0.1 steem.
This seems like a misreading of some aspect of the economics involved. What are you basing this off of? Whitepaper says : In order to compensate for the ever increasing precision, the STEEM network performs a 10:1 “reverse split” every 32,000,000 blocks (about 3 years). When they reached about 5b coins which is about 32 000 000 blocks the split will occur. After that SP tokens will be backed by 0.1 steem since 1/10 have been wiped. There are no 'SP tokens' it is a virtual unit that is derived by multiplying the number of VESTS tokens (largely a hidden token in the system from the perspective of end users) by the exchange rate. When the reverse split happens the exchange rate will be reduced by a factor of 10 to compensate. Nothing will change about SP ownership except the position of the decimal. 1 Steem will still be convertible to 1 SP (and vice versa, allowing for the two-year delay). I need clarification here. If SP tokens are steem tokens why are they not also being reduced 10:1 ? Say after 32 000 000 blocks 5b steem were created. Out of those 5b steem 4b are held as SP tokens and 1b are held as steem token. If you only reduce steem tokens then you would burn 9/10 of 1b. There would still be 4b steem tokens in circulation held in SP tokens. Now if you burn all the tokens as mentionned in the whitepaper ( 5b of them) you also need to burn the SP tokens.. |
|
|
|
If 1/10 of the supply is being wiped every 3 years then we have a problem cuz SP tokens will only be backed by 0.1 steem.
This seems like a misreading of some aspect of the economics involved. What are you basing this off of? The money supply roughly doubles every year, then every three years it is reduced to 1/10. This keeps the coin count numbers approximately within the same range longer term, but doesn't affect much else. Huh it doesn't affect much else? SP tokens will no longer be backed by 1 steem instead it will be backed by 0.1 steem which is a big deal imo. 3 years later it will happen again and 1 SP token will only be backed by 0.01 steem. You end up in a situation where there is a lot more SP token in circulation than steem , then starts the cash out race ! |
|
|
|
If 1/10 of the supply is being wiped every 3 years then we have a problem cuz SP tokens will only be backed by 0.1 steem.
This seems like a misreading of some aspect of the economics involved. What are you basing this off of? Whitepaper says : In order to compensate for the ever increasing precision, the STEEM network performs a 10:1 “reverse split” every 32,000,000 blocks (about 3 years). When they reached about 5b coins which is about 32 000 000 blocks the split will occur. After that SP tokens will be backed by 0.1 steem since 1/10 have been wiped. |
|
|
|
|
If 1/10 of the supply is being wiped every 3 years then we have a problem cuz SP tokens will only be backed by 0.1 steem.
|
|
|
|
He acquired nearly 1% back during the "sneaky mine" phase. You can understand why he wasn't willing to attack this coin the way he normally attacks pump and dump scams. That $millions bought his "I am not omniscient about the potential future not being a disaster" attitude. (assuming your $5m valuation of his SP is correct) Is that a meritocracy  You can see why he would have an incentive to not speak about how it will be a disaster for those who invest in SP now (requires a 2 year lock up cashed out over 104 weeks), while he is cashing out every week. Chaching. Fools please buy Steemit and give your money to smooth. I did not ever tell anyone to invest in Steem. I think the long term prospects for the value of the token are not great. I've told the developers of Steem that. I've told people on my crypto social circle that. I've posted that. I don't know what more I can do. I did not support the sneaky-mine and said at the time that I would not promote the coin to crypto speculators (although kind of an easy promise to make since I never promote any crypto coins -- my best guess is all going to zero, though at different rates). It was, however, far more transparent and than the Dash instamine or the Bytecoin hidden premine. For the record, when I first stated that opinion (after the initial mining) it was worth approximately nothing, so the the alleged current market value has changed nothing here. That said, I also do not think it necessarily will with certainty go to zero, and people can do their own analysis and reach their own conclusions. Hell, even Auroracoin and other pure garbage (nothing person to Auroracoin devs) still has some value. Steem has more merit than that. Hey dude! Why do you waste your time jutifying yourself to nerds on a crypto forum when you could be in your private yacht sipping mojitos with lots of bitches ! Tell us all to fuck off and go spend your millions! That's what i would do anyway. |
|
|
|
Is steem.it really profitable to Bloggers? From what i have seen so far, yes it is. Buying steem power tho could end up being a terrible idea, even more so if steem team has a fat steem stash that they could sell while you are left holding the bag with your steem power locked monies. They are adding 3000 signups per day. These new bloggers dilute the available money for payout which is roughly 3.875% of the marketcap per year (actually less than that, was $2 million total recently). This 3.875% is shared amongst all bloggers, so as the number of bloggers increases, if the market cap doesn't increase proportionally, then the payouts decrease. Also the payouts are mathematically structured such that the most popular get quadratically more payouts than the average ones. So there are some blog posts with $100s of payouts, but the average is only a few dollars each (many only $0 or pennies per blog). And these payouts will decline per the math I showed. Eventually there will be many pissed off SP investors (who can't sell while the price is crashing) and many pissed off bloggers who don't earn what they expected to earn. It is not suprising that 3000 bloggers per day are rushing to signup to get their free $10 of STEEM. Because blogging is not a very profitable job any more in the general case (posting photos yourself and your vacation, nobody gives a fuck to pay for that). So by showing these $100s payouts for the few most popular blog posts, Steemit is creating a false expectation of hype that blogging has suddenly become an easy profitable endeavor. This has implosion of the fantasy written all over its future.Dan is going to destroy the image of crypto-currency is the minds of bloggers. Their first exposure to CC will be being sucked into a lie. Steemit's incentives creates a very unatural vibe, you end up with a situation where people will do anything for monies. Users don't speak their mind for fear of being downvoted but don't care about exposing their personal lives. Then you have ghost threads because there is no incentives to answer to it..users that otherwise would have helped their fellow human now won't bother wasting their time with a $0 thread. |
|
|
|
Unless I missed something, I'm surprised no one mentioned that every 32 million blocks, they do a "reverse split" where they convert 10 tokens back to 1.
Are you serious? How do they do that ? Coding magic I guess. Just like a lot of countries with hyperinflation converted their currency, Steem will do it every 3 years. I'm sure the developers will be long gone by then and the web page abandoned. Same as in Mr_Robot when they wipe all the debt monies off the face of the planet. This is interesting tho, cuz you can't do this shit in real life with physical currencies. Actually it is illegal to do it. Code allows you to do some crazy things. Just read their doc, apparently 1/10 of the coins will be wiped every time supply hits 5b. As time goes by, SP holders will hold a lot more coins than actually exist, in other words they won't be able to cash out. |
|
|
|
Unless I missed something, I'm surprised no one mentioned that every 32 million blocks, they do a "reverse split" where they convert 10 tokens back to 1.
Are you serious? How do they do that ? |
|
|
|
|
