Steem pyramid scheme revealed

[generalizethis]

Steem is getting rogered here, and on bittrex at least I am only seeing sell orders at the moment. Think the market will keep sliding from here. What surprises me is that synereo (as the alternative) hasn't really risen

https://steemit.com/steemit/@generalizethis/why-steemit-may-fail

*adjusted title to be more palatable

[1715292637]

1715292637

[1715292637]

1715292637

[iamnotback]

https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Reddit%2C%20Instagram%2C%20Snapchat%2C%20whatsapp%2C%20twitter&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT-8

[DecentralizeEconomics]

What surprises me is that synereo (as the alternative) hasn't really risen

Wait for it

[iamnotback]

Well fuck those who bought ETC when I said to yesterday, are up 36% in 36 hours. And those who sold STEEM as I said to are down -20% at least. Those who followed me and sold STEEM and bought ETC have more than 50% advantage over those that didn't.

But what the fuck do I know. You all better join smooth and power up.

I bet there is a huge arbitrage opportunity for those who sell ETH and buy ETC.

ETH is going to lose this battle eventually.

Those who stay in ETH will eventually see their tokens become worthless.

Remember the DAO benefactor hacker has a lot of ETC to incentivize miners with and he can profit from shorting ETH and/or taking leveraged long on ETC. MPeX will not stop until he has totally destroyed Vitalik (more accurately Vitalik will not stop until he has destroyed himself).

Place your bets on a little naive delusional boy versus a grown up man who has defeated many large powers already in his career. MPeX told the SEC to fuck off. You should read his CV.

I don't know who is going to win or lose but I can say that this hard fork has set back the industry.

Disagree. It has clarified what is important and made the ecosystem much more astute.

Unfortunately some ETH idiots still haven't learned, and so they will lose all their tokens' value.

[smooth]

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?

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.

But what the fuck do I know. You all better join smooth and power up.

I have been buying ETC for a week as part of rebalancing my crypto holdings. I might be done buying it for now, even though it still has potentially significant upside.

I did see your post yesterday about it, and I agreed with it, but most of my position was already established.

[iamnotback]

But what the fuck do I know. You all better join smooth and power up.

I have been buying ETC for a week as part of rebalancing my crypto holdings. I might be done buying it for now, even though it still has potentially significant upside.

I did see your post yesterday about it, and I agreed with it, but most of my position was already established.

It is not clear from your comments in this thread whether you believe it is impossible or highly improbable for a competitor to Steem to be viable.

What I am trying to explain is that the chance of Steem succeeding to become a very successful social network is very improbable. So having more experiments (especially if they are not exact copies of Steem and attempt to diverge greatly from Steem) is the best chance we have of actually hitting a homerun with one of them.

I'd give Steem (the source code, not Steemit, Inc nor the current STEEM tokens) better odds had the blockchain also been forkable. Because more groups would be able to compete sooner. But actually it is good for me the blockchain is not forkable. Gives me more time. And good for you too perhaps, as it gives you more time to cash out of your lucky mine (although you are giving mixed signals having stated upthread that rebalancing your portfolio is logical but then today saying you'd consider buying SP). I can't imagine what it is like to be in your position with such a large stake in a project that attempts to turn blockchains into a corporation. I realize now you are more agnostic than I originally thought. Which is good in a way. But I don't think I would see the point of doing a blockchain that 40 - 80% owned by a corporation. Might as well just run a corporate database and dispense with all the bullshit obfuscation. In other words, my bullshit meter wouldn't make me feel very proud if I was in your shoes. Okay I realize the plan is to give it all away to free signups, but  there was another way to do that without any "pre"-mining of the tokens that will be given away where we have to trust Steemit's promise and follow through (and trust that the abandonment rate of those tokens isn't significant since we are told that is what will dilute the few insiders who go the rest of the lucky mine). I mean the decentralization is all an obfuscation any way.

Altcoins are wild speculations. That is why not having a medium-term investment option for Steem is such a critical error.

Unless you state otherwise, I am assuming that your stance is driven much by disbelief in words/plans and strong affinity to shipping projects. If so, I'd agree.

[smooth]

But what the fuck do I know. You all better join smooth and power up.

I have been buying ETC for a week as part of rebalancing my crypto holdings. I might be done buying it for now, even though it still has potentially significant upside.

I did see your post yesterday about it, and I agreed with it, but most of my position was already established.

It is not clear from your comments in this thread whether you believe it is impossible or highly improbable for a competitor to Steem to be viable.

Neither.

I think it is becoming somewhat difficult for a direct competitor to overcome the first-mover advantage, especially given that no direct competitors are even ready yet, Steem is still growing quickly, and the platform is improving at a reasonable pace.

But I wouldn't say impossible or even highly improbable. (I would say, though, that, for any particular competitor identified in advance, it is reasonably improbable.)

If growth stalls then the odds shift significantly.

What I am trying to explain is that the chance of Steem succeeding to become a very successful social network is very improbable. So having more experiments (especially if they are not exact copies of Steem and attempt to diverge greatly from Steem) is the best chance we have of actually hitting a homerun with one of them.

I agree with that and I think I said so earlier in this thread in words similar to these: Most new ventures fail. Most cryptocoins fail. The odds for Steem (or anything else), in absolute terms, are probably not that good. Don't put all your eggs in one basket.

Unless you state otherwise, I am assuming that your stance is driven much by disbelief in words/plans and strong affinity to shipping projects. If so, I'd agree.

Correct.

[iamnotback]

I couldn't join Steem because I need radical changes to it before I could in good conscience throw all my effort into it.

There are so many of its features that I feel have to be totally changed. For one, I think whales should not have any more voting power (on content) than a dolphin does. My design accomplishes this.

I am radically changing what they have. I wouldn't have been able to work with them. I did consider it, then I realized it would be impossible. Just so you know, I want to work with others, but I have to believe in what I am working on.

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)

Also every elephant unintentionally kills things it steps on. Ditto Godzilla when he gingering tries to walk between buildings.

Common sense shit like that is why I don't work with whackos.

[sgk]

watching this

[r0ach]

Put up new BTC & Ethereum market analysis.  It's better than most the market analysis people have been putting up on Steemit (imo at least)

The r0ach report vol 2: Bitcoin happenings & Ethereum rough consensus attack

https://steemit.com/blockchain/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-vol-2-bitcoin-happenings-and-ethereum-rough-consensus-attack

[generalizethis]

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.

[r0ach]

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 private company issuing shares of itself, so that voting dynamic just mirrors the function of proof of stake where whale takes all.  Whoever owns the stake controls the whole thing, so they control voting by default no matter what.

[generalizethis]

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.

[AlexGR]

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?

[generalizethis]

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."

[iamnotback]

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 private company issuing shares of itself, so that voting dynamic just mirrors the function of proof of stake where whale takes all.  Whoever owns the stake controls the whole thing, so they control voting by default no matter what.

It makes sense that Dan would conflate the blockchain consensus algorithm with the social networking relevance function, because in my opinion Dan is whacko (that doesn't mean he and his cohorts aren't highly productive coders).

I am employing the same reasoning as to why there is no medium-term investment option for speculators, why they launched with an 80 - 90% stealth "pre"-mine, and why that forces them to not allow any forking of the Steem blockchain.

Even I'd probably use the same reasoning to explain bizarre technical design choices such as not allowing enough bytes for the balances, forcing a chaotic forward stock split every 3 years (all so the transaction size can be 30 bytes instead of perhaps 48 bytes as a form of premature optimization).

Per my prior post that explained why I decided not to work with them (and instead to try to compete with them), it is because "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink".

There are 50 whales with very strong vested interests. I believe politics will make it impossible to change certain key aspects of the design. Maybe they can change the voting reward algorithm at some point, but the "pre"-mine they will never agree to undo and thus the forking of Steem they can't allow any time soon. Ditto the 50% yearly (150% for next months) debasement of STEEM seems to be impossible for them to change.

[iamnotback]

Put up new BTC & Ethereum market analysis.  It's better than most the market analysis people have been putting up on Steemit (imo at least)

The r0ach report vol 2: Bitcoin happenings & Ethereum rough consensus attack

https://steemit.com/blockchain/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-vol-2-bitcoin-happenings-and-ethereum-rough-consensus-attack

Some useful analysis for me, so I upvoted.

Have you noticed they are now hiding comments entirely that don't have an upvote or something (some new number in parenthesis next to each username)

smooth you might be encouraged to read that some ladies say they want to learn about CC and blockchains and that being another interest motivating joining Steem:

https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@pixielolz/society-says-that-you-re-supposed-to-introduce-yourself-so-here-i-am-introducing-myself-#@anonymint/re-pixielolz-society-says-that-you-re-supposed-to-introduce-yourself-so-here-i-am-introducing-myself--20160731t000356858z

[iamnotback]

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?

The timing aspect of the voting algorithm is not entirely clear to me (is it to anyone?). I think more or less if the whales vote a dozen or more times per day, then the full weight of their stake is determing the highest rewarded posts by an order-of-magnitude or two (the quadratic weighting of voted stake weighted to rewards and the vortex of posts that are high ranked become more high ranked because seen more amplifies this effect).

Thus I think it doesn't take much effort on the part of the whales to dominate the content relevance.

If the whales have too much influence over the content, then the site lacks degrees-of-freedom and can only become the site that the whales want it to be. But communities are much more diverse than that, if you want to bring in people from the outside of the limited view of the world that the 50 whales possess.

Edit: note afaics that removing the time and quadratic weighting is impossible for Steem, because as I explained upthread, it would allow voters to profitably vote for themselves always. I was only able to solve this by totally changing the design of how STEEM POWER are structured. This is another reason my confidence is very high that I can compete and beat Steem. (my doubts are due to being so far behind on implementation and not being 80% perfect health yet more like 66.6% health, but hopefully I will team up with other(s) soon)

[chryspano]

Have you noticed they are now hiding comments entirely that don't have an upvote or something (some new number in parenthesis next to each username)

You can click the "Show" button at the end of the page to see them, imo it's much better this way than having "greyed" comments all over the place, the number seems to be some kind of reputation, don't know details

[iamnotback]

Have you noticed they are now hiding comments entirely that don't have an upvote or something (some new number in parenthesis next to each username)

You can click the "Show" button at the end of the page to see them, imo it's much better this way than having "greyed" comments all over the place, the number seems to be some kind of reputation, don't know details

Well it seems to go further than the former greyed out effect in that it is hiding comments that have no negative votes. This appears to be the new reputation system Dan recently blogged about.

I haven't completely sorted out how I will deal with spam, but I don't think the way Dan is headed here is correct. But I encourage him to continue!   I pray "they" (whales? Or ned?) give Dan the keys and let him run wild with "improvements". Perfect.

Edit: one of the key breakthroughs in my design is I don't use stake-weighting to bandwidth limit. Instead I use a depleteable resource of the user (not proof-of-work as the attacker can do this more efficiently than the mobile user), yet this doesn't reduce their balance. There are some significant advantages over stake weighting and I think I have invented something totally new to crypto. I will have several innovations that are totally new.