Bitshares voter apathy strikes again.
I never really got involved with bitshares, I was certain it's not going to take off due to complexity (my rule is if you can't say what an altcoin does within a short sentence, the altcoin is DOA). What happened there? |
|
|
|
I don't think people can invest in Steemit as a community, because they can't develop their own community. Getting a lot of followers doesn't really mean you will earn a lot. If the whales don't vote you, you don't earn much. The ones that are voting me very heavily in the first 30 minutes (up 80 - 100 votes) is because they expect a whale to upvote my posts. I will stop blog posting for a while, because I don't want to feel I am abusing the BROKEN system.
You are too preoccupied with the broken system and aren't even doing your job with your own votes: https://steemd.com/@anonymintVoting power 99.5369% (most of the time I'm checking this, you're maxed out and it's not recharging) You have ~10m vests in voting power. It may be a few cents, but they are useful to start an upvote trend in newer articles that you may deem worthy. The impact I can have as developer far exceeds any impact I could have by voting. I am busy figuring out how Steem is fundamentally flawed and how I am going to fix it. (I did waste one day experimenting with voting) You do read a lot of threads and comments and spend a lot of time writing comments. A few clicks for upvotes in things that you find nice (in content that you are already engaged in) won't hurt your time schedule. We can bitch all day about how whales don't do their work, but that would be hypocrisy if we don't do ours. |
|
|
|
I saw the word anarchy used about 400 times in this thread. Am I the only person that thinks "anarchism" is a meaningless word that people just use to try and look cool?
I guess it depends on the country. In some countries "anarchists" are perceived to be black-hoodie vandals, not philosophers of liberty... |
|
|
|
I don't think people can invest in Steemit as a community, because they can't develop their own community. Getting a lot of followers doesn't really mean you will earn a lot. If the whales don't vote you, you don't earn much. The ones that are voting me very heavily in the first 30 minutes (up 80 - 100 votes) is because they expect a whale to upvote my posts. I will stop blog posting for a while, because I don't want to feel I am abusing the BROKEN system.
You are too preoccupied with the broken system and aren't even doing your job with your own votes: https://steemd.com/@anonymintVoting power 99.5369% (most of the time I'm checking this, you're maxed out and it's not recharging) You have ~10m vests in voting power. It may be a few cents, but they are useful to start an upvote trend in newer articles that you may deem worthy. |
|
|
|
|
"The site itself charges 70% commission so I actually received even more tips than what I finally got paid."
LOL...
|
|
|
|
I have a feeling that early in the week when all the password restrictions on bfx are expired, everyones gonna be putting their dollars into btc to get them the hell out of there. surely this will push us back up to near 700
666  |
|
|
|
It is very fishy from pump day 1. How can steem be limited if those writers get rewards, and repeat? I mean if unlimited writers can make unlimted rewards, and the steem's total supply is limited? Illogical scheme.
Rewards originate from inflation (new coins issued). Rewards are a fixed percentage of the new coin supply issued. With a fixed-sized marketcap, if userbase goes 10x or 100x, average rewards go down 10x or 100x. Rewards are currently excessive precisely because the userbase is in the tens-of-thousands instead of millions. |
|
|
|
Wow, can't be much to talk about if we nearly have a whole page discussing Jimbo saying good morning.
http://www.coindesk.com/cryptsy-ceo-millions-digital-currency-steal/Top article in coindesk right now... Apparently "cryptsy hack" = "cryptsy stole peoples money" So mintpal, then cryptsy, now bitfinex... all 3 cases they were saying "hack, hack". What's your bet that bitfinex was not ...mintpaled, or cryptsied?  |
|
|
|
Remember the Cryptsy "hack"? http://www.coindesk.com/cryptsy-ceo-millions-digital-currency-steal/Cryptsy CEO Paul Vernon may have stolen as much as $3.3m from the now-defunct digital currency exchange and destroyed evidence of his illicit actions. That's according to new court documents from the ongoing class action lawsuit filed against the troubled industry exec. A report from court-appointed receiver James Sallah, published on 2nd August, details efforts to take control of assets tied to Cryptsy, most notably the digital currency holdings sought by the exchange's former customers. The updates are the latest to follow Cryptsy's collapse in January, when after months of growing issues, Vernon blamed the closure on a previously undisclosed hack. At the time, Vernon claimed as much as $10m in customer liabilities. He later told CoinDesk that customers were misled in order to avoid a "panic". Yet, court documents that surfaced at the time revealed that Cryptsy’s failure was predicted a month prior due to a lack of profit. That collapse ultimately sparked a class action lawsuit, and in April, a court approved an asset freeze that pushed the defunct exchange into receivership. Now, that receiver is alleging millions of dollars worth of digital currency was taken from the exchange by Vernon over the course of its operation. Sallah alleged: "During that period of two years and seven months, Vernon transferred and converted over 1,100 bitcoin into currency in the amount of over $3.3 million. That $3.3 million-plus was deposited into Vernon’s and his now ex-wife’s (Defendant Lorie Ann Nettles’) joint bank account." This amount included roughly $2.2m in bitcoin sold by way of Coinbase, and more than $600,000 in various digital currencies liquidated via other exchanges like Bittrex, BTER and CEX.io, the document states.Vernon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. ... |
|
|
|
Lol, you identified some of my techniques which I was sort of doing out of habit, not really consciously.  Well it sucks but some people still mae money from the coin i guess...
And why would it suck? |
|
|
|
I get the feeling that all this thing with the rape accusation was too well orchestrated and not very well substantiated because most if not all of these women were in (pre-agreed) sadomasochistic relations with him.
So why was it done? If my paranoid self had to guess, I'd say the theft was probably government-ordered and this fool was just a convenient patsy. And then they unloaded on him all the rape charges and kept the coins.
Surely you didnt actually mean to publish your weird thought processes? It feels too-damned manufactured. |
|
|
|
|
I get the feeling that all this thing with the rape accusation was too well orchestrated and not very well substantiated because most if not all of these women were in (pre-agreed) sadomasochistic relations with him.
So why was it done? If my paranoid self had to guess, I'd say the theft was probably government-ordered and this fool was just a convenient patsy. And then they unloaded on him all the rape charges and kept the coins.
|
|
|
|
"well, I don't care what it's called, as long as I get paid"
I don't know why you guys are still stuck on the getting paid delusion. Most people are not going to be making any significant money on Steem via the blogging rewards system. Do the math. Rewards are 7.75% of market cap yearly with 50,000 signed up users, so 0.0775 × $200m ÷ (12 × 50000) = $26 monthly per user. But the rewards are distributed non-linearly roughly in a power-law distribution where the upper 20% get 85% of the rewards, thus 80% of the users will get 0.15 × 0.0775 × $200m ÷ (12 × 40000) = $5 monthly. If you argue that actual usership is 1/10th of that, then multiple those figures by 10, but realize the system is failing at adoption then (and the market cap is way too high for the number of actual users). Social networks are typically valued at around $100 per user, if we are looking at the stable case down the line. Even if we up that to say $1000 with expectation of acceleration and more ecommerce than typical social networks ad funded models, it is still only $77.5 per year per user without factoring in the power-law distribution effect. We need another reason for them to like to be on Steem. Censorship resistance. In a world where social networks tweak their algorithms to bury what they don't like, in a world where social networks try to create upheaval in countries, or shape elections, or censor influential people from posting altogether, this is something that could be of great value. |
|
|
|
Does the Steemit name convey this meaning
Have you considered that steemit cannot be compared, even on the name-basis, with any other platform, solely due to the difference in its economic model (paid content vs free content)? Meaning that people's reaction could be .... "well, I don't care what it's called, as long as I get paid". |
|
|
|
|
Lol, and he continued? Ah well... what can I say.
|
|
|
|
|
Just say "It's 77% of the 10% = 7%" and you are done. Don't write entire paragraphs with your scarce time.
|
|
|
|
|
Who is the other larimer, what is his role, and does he have a nickname on steemit?
|
|
|
|
I would argue that 50-500 million users on Steem is highly improbable, but conditional on that happening, a very high (relative to current cryptos) market cap is almost a certainty.
Of this I'm confident as well: ETH has nothing on steem in terms of real life use and it will either have to drop below 200mn, or STEEM will have to go beyond 1bn. Otherwise it's a tremendous market anomaly. I don't know if it'll get to threaten bitcoin though - although I can't rule it out. |
|
|
|
And something more: The only thing that may be worthy of your time is finding a solution to the reward scaling issue.
This is the only thing that I can think of that it can render the platform DOA.
Users can experience explosive growth, say go from 50k to 50mn. (1000x)
What about rewards though? Can marketcap go from 200mn to 200bn to preserve them? Obviously not.
Why not? Because if I extend this even further to a user base like 500 million (closer to twitter and instagram levels - and still 1/3 or 1/4 that of facebook), it then requires a marketcap of 2 trillion - which is an absurd amount. And I'm not accounting for increase in value due to network effect - my assumption is for linear relation. It is not absurd. The global networth is perhaps $500 trillion. Social networking could be very large segment of the knowledge age economy. Bitcoin is nothing maybe 100,000 to a million users and has a $10b mcap. In theory everything is possible. But I would argue strongly against its probability of happening. What I think will happen, is that a trendline will emerge over time regarding marketcap size (I predict it will be relatively stable) and user expansion (moderate but steady increase). We will then be able to extrapolate the rewards by extending the curve into hypothetical space (future userbase) and find the point of non-viability for the average westerner (he'll have to bail), then the point of non-viability for average south.american / eastern-european, then africans and asians... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
