Steem pyramid scheme revealed

[iamnotback]

You guys don't know or just don't want to answer? I am new here so not sure if my post are even visible?

It is has already been answer upthread and the other Steem threads.

It is a complex answer and I guess we are tired to repeat. The Steem structure is very complex to explain.

OK thanks for your answer. I thought my question was pretty straightforward.

Do you know where I can get the full documentation and which section of the whitepaper talk about vest?

When the white paper discusses Steem Power, it is talking about Vests. The white paper does not go into all of the technical details. You can read some of imnotback's explanations in this thread, or google and try to get a grasp of what is going on. To be honest, Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity is easier to figure out.

I have re-read the Steem Power section, the paper doesn't discuss anything about stock split or vest. I have read all steem thread that's how I know about stock split and vest but I can't find any technical details about these

Here's where it talks about the reverse split. https://steem.io/SteemWhitePaper.pdf#page=39

Thanks for the link.  Paper says that when the split occurs all balances of steem are divided by 10 and all price multiplied by 10,that make sense but what happens to the Vest aka Steem Power balances?

They mean both STEEM and SP. I had explained the only reason they are doing that is they didn't want to add an extra two bytes for balances, and thus they must rescale them every 3 years.

Do I have to repeat this every two weeks, when someone new arrives and doesn't find the old discussion.

[1714875235]

1714875235

[1714875235]

1714875235

[1714875235]

1714875235

[1714875235]

1714875235

[1714875235]

1714875235

[1714875235]

1714875235

[Pikachu45]

You guys don't know or just don't want to answer? I am new here so not sure if my post are even visible?

It is has already been answer upthread and the other Steem threads.

It is a complex answer and I guess we are tired to repeat. The Steem structure is very complex to explain.

OK thanks for your answer. I thought my question was pretty straightforward.

Do you know where I can get the full documentation and which section of the whitepaper talk about vest?

When the white paper discusses Steem Power, it is talking about Vests. The white paper does not go into all of the technical details. You can read some of imnotback's explanations in this thread, or google and try to get a grasp of what is going on. To be honest, Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity is easier to figure out.

I have re-read the Steem Power section, the paper doesn't discuss anything about stock split or vest. I have read all steem thread that's how I know about stock split and vest but I can't find any technical details about these

Here's where it talks about the reverse split. https://steem.io/SteemWhitePaper.pdf#page=39

Thanks for the link.  Paper says that when the split occurs all balances of steem are divided by 10 and all price multiplied by 10,that make sense but what happens to the Vest aka Steem Power balances?

They mean both STEEM and SP. I had explained the only reason they are doing that is they didn't want to add an extra two bytes for balances, and thus they must rescale them every 3 years.

Do I have to repeat this every two weeks, when someone new arrives and doesn't find the old discussion.

Sounds like you need to chill a bit. Anyway I got it now so thanks. If the price of steem doesn't go up and you have your funds locked in SP you are losing 10% value ( minus curating reward) every year  , as an investor might as well buy some steem or steem dollar.

[bones261]

Sounds like you need to chill a bit. Anyway I got it now so thanks. If the price of steem doesn't go up and you have your funds locked in SP you are losing 10% value ( minus curating reward) every year  , as an investor might as well buy some steem or steem dollar.

If you are a short term or medium term speculator, keeping Steem is probably the best way. The Steem is liquid, but it does not help you with voting power for the web page. Also, the liquid Steem does not participate in the Steem Power vesting pool. So, if you hold Steem, you are hoping more steem gets converted to steam power than the other way. The Steem dollar is supposed to strive to be pegged at $1.00. So far, that has not been the case. Probably, because it is the only liquid asset people are getting right now to dump right away after getting a score with one of their posts. You also get interest on the Steem Dollar holdings if it is worth below $1.00 USD.

[iamnotback]

You guys don't know or just don't want to answer? I am new here so not sure if my post are even visible?

It is has already been answer upthread and the other Steem threads.

It is a complex answer and I guess we are tired to repeat. The Steem structure is very complex to explain.

OK thanks for your answer. I thought my question was pretty straightforward.

Do you know where I can get the full documentation and which section of the whitepaper talk about vest?

When the white paper discusses Steem Power, it is talking about Vests. The white paper does not go into all of the technical details. You can read some of imnotback's explanations in this thread, or google and try to get a grasp of what is going on. To be honest, Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity is easier to figure out.

I have re-read the Steem Power section, the paper doesn't discuss anything about stock split or vest. I have read all steem thread that's how I know about stock split and vest but I can't find any technical details about these

Here's where it talks about the reverse split. https://steem.io/SteemWhitePaper.pdf#page=39

Thanks for the link.  Paper says that when the split occurs all balances of steem are divided by 10 and all price multiplied by 10,that make sense but what happens to the Vest aka Steem Power balances?

They mean both STEEM and SP. I had explained the only reason they are doing that is they didn't want to add an extra two bytes for balances, and thus they must rescale them every 3 years.

Do I have to repeat this every two weeks, when someone new arrives and doesn't find the old discussion.

Sounds like you need to chill a bit. Anyway I got it now so thanks. If the price of steem doesn't go up and you have your funds locked in SP you are losing 10% value ( minus curating reward) every year  , as an investor might as well buy some steem or steem dollar.

Seriously you need to read the thread. If you hold SP, the maximum is 6.7% and typically it is closer to 0% or even positive gains.

[generalizethis]

So I don't have to jump through this hoop anymore?

https://www.criterion.com/films/28635-muriel-or-the-time-of-return

Hmmm...

Amazon wins. Bought a like new copy for same price and don't have a new password to create or remember.

If only there was a way to link sellers to buyers directly (without credit card hassles)....

[AlexGR]

The reverse split sounds like a y2k-type upcoming fiasco (even if it is every 3 years). Exchanges and trading will be extremely problematic during the transition. And some people won't even know about the reverse split, selling their steem for pennies - thinking it went up in value... lol.

If they think it through, and how many potential issues it can have in a mature ecosystem, they'll probably cancel it.

[iamnotback]

If they think it through, and how many potential issues it can have in a mature ecosystem, they'll probably cancel it.

Afaik, they can't cancel it. I presume they chose to optimize away a couple of bytes per transaction and thus they must normalize the balances every 3 years at current 100% annual growth in the money supply.

The reason I was aware of this optimization is I had read about some of Graphene's design decisions back when I challenged the claim of 100,000 TPS and they admitted it was only about 100 - 1000 TPS unless they had very tight control over the witness hardware. Remember I was the (one of the) guy(s) who first exposed that 100,000 TPS lie/hype last year.

[AlexGR]

If they think it through, and how many potential issues it can have in a mature ecosystem, they'll probably cancel it.

Afaik, they can't cancel it. I presume they chose to optimize away a couple of bytes per transaction and thus they must normalize the balances every 3 years at current 100% annual growth in the money supply.

The reason I was aware of this optimization is I had read about some of Graphene's design decisions back when I challenged the claim of 100,000 TPS and they admitted it was only about 100 - 1000 TPS unless they had very tight control over the witness hardware. Remember I was the (one of the) guy(s) who first exposed that 100,000 TPS lie/hype last year.

What is the bottleneck between 100-1000 and 100k?

(ps, your voting power is almost constantly maxed out... vote some more )

[iamnotback]

If they think it through, and how many potential issues it can have in a mature ecosystem, they'll probably cancel it.

Afaik, they can't cancel it. I presume they chose to optimize away a couple of bytes per transaction and thus they must normalize the balances every 3 years at current 100% annual growth in the money supply.

The reason I was aware of this optimization is I had read about some of Graphene's design decisions back when I challenged the claim of 100,000 TPS and they admitted it was only about 100 - 1000 TPS unless they had very tight control over the witness hardware. Remember I was the (one of the) guy(s) who first exposed that 100,000 TPS lie/hype last year.

What is the bottleneck between 100-1000 and 100k?

(ps, your voting power is almost constantly maxed out... vote some more )

That not every witness has the same level of ultra expensive hardware and connectivity. That was the case for a more decentralized assumption where witnesses (delegates) could come and go. But Steem appears to be a whale controlled blockchain, thus they can probably make sure the witnesses have a certain consistency of performance so as to handle higher transaction rates. But you are losing persmissionless quality.

Also the other bound is afaics Steem can't be sharded (at least one reason appears to be that voting is a real-time globalized calculation so eventual consistency is not compatible). You've got to funnel everything through one witnesses at a time, round-robin. This is going to cause scaling and reliability problems. Just wait.

Any way, I don't think this is the limiting factor for Steem right now. The limiting factors are more on the economics and voting rewards algorithm, and features of the UI.

I presume smooth or someone will correct me if I have made any incorrect statements.

[iamnotback]

Can someone please tell me how much money Steem has given away to bloggers thus far? I want to compute an estimate of their acquisition cost per signup. That cost is all the money they are paying out to bloggers.

I want to compare with the typical acquisition cost for other social networks.

Links I found which are relevant, but I don't have time to write down any thoughts about these:

https://www.flirtbox.co.uk/free-dating/2015/10/31/free-dating-sites-vs-premium-dating-sites/

https://www.tradingfloor.com/posts/linkedin--paying-up-for-new-users-23824678

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-user-acquisition-cost-for-a-Facebook-game

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/28/how-much-are-you-worth-to-facebook

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tristanlouis/2013/08/31/how-much-is-a-user-worth/

http://mashable.com/2013/12/05/revenue-per-user-metrics/

http://www.forentrepreneurs.com/startup-killer/

[smooth]

If they think it through, and how many potential issues it can have in a mature ecosystem, they'll probably cancel it.

Afaik, they can't cancel it. I presume they chose to optimize away a couple of bytes per transaction and thus they must normalize the balances every 3 years at current 100% annual growth in the money supply.

The reason I was aware of this optimization is I had read about some of Graphene's design decisions back when I challenged the claim of 100,000 TPS and they admitted it was only about 100 - 1000 TPS unless they had very tight control over the witness hardware. Remember I was the (one of the) guy(s) who first exposed that 100,000 TPS lie/hype last year.

What is the bottleneck between 100-1000 and 100k?

(ps, your voting power is almost constantly maxed out... vote some more )

That not every witness has the same level of ultra expensive hardware and connectivity. That was the case for a more decentralized assumption where witnesses (delegates) could come and go. But Steem appears to be a whale controlled blockchain, thus they can probably make sure the witnesses have a certain consistency of performance so as to handle higher transaction rates. But you are losing persmissionless quality.

Even if not whale-controlled, the number of primary witnesses was deliberately reduced to 19 to make it more feasible for them to all have high end hardware and connectivity. Of course this raises different centralization issues. Witnesses who don't keep up can be voted out, although that does raise some obvious attacks if not whale-controlled, as with all PoS.

Also the other bound is afaics Steem can't be sharded (at least one reason appears to be that voting is a real-time globalized calculation so eventual consistency is not compatible). You've got to funnel everything through one witnesses at a time, round-robin. This is going to cause scaling and reliability problems. Just wait.

Currently there isn't much "real-time" in voting. The real time display is just an indicator; consensus payouts are made only when voting is quiescent for some period, so perhaps with some design changes eventual consistency could be worked in. It wouldn't work exactly as currently implemented so I agree there.

Any way, I don't think this is the limiting factor for Steem right now. The limiting factors are more on the economics and voting rewards algorithm, and features of the UI.

Agree with that too.

Can someone please tell me how much money Steem has given away to bloggers thus far?

Double the amount of Steem Dollars outstanding -- $1.4 million -- is a reasonable ballpark estimate, so roughly $3 million.

[iamnotback]

Can someone please tell me how much money Steem has given away to bloggers thus far?

Double the amount of Steem Dollars outstanding -- $1.4 million -- is a reasonable ballpark estimate, so roughly $3 million.

Thanks.

https://steemd.com/distribution

So $3,000,000 ÷ $40,000 = $75 per signup

Active accounts are usually measured after 30 days, so we can say precisely but looks like active accounts are 1/5, so $375 per active user. Assuming your estimate of expenditures is correct.

It is roughly on par with advertising for signups:

https://www.flirtbox.co.uk/free-dating/2015/10/31/free-dating-sites-vs-premium-dating-sites/

Yet the money is going in users' pockets. So I'd say that is a positive. And half of the expenditure is locked up for 104 weeks minimum, i.e. isn't really spent cash.

[iamnotback]

Examples of that 80% attrition rate:

https://steemit.com/@kim-dahae (some guy calling her NIGGER)
https://steemit.com/@toplist (her interests were not met by like interests)
https://steemit.com/@chickfreak (she wanted to move her blog to Steemit but apparently realized it wouldn't work)

This may be hurting crypto-currency.

[iamnotback]

Sorry to harp on this point, but Steem is turning into a sob story bailout welfare program, for those can't produce in society normally:

https://steemit.com/steemit/@timd/my-first-week-on-steemit-making-usd700-and-saving-for-my-holiday

I would think we'd want to be attracting the producers of quality content and engaging, flourishing sub-communities.

[AlexGR]

If they think it through, and how many potential issues it can have in a mature ecosystem, they'll probably cancel it.

Afaik, they can't cancel it. I presume they chose to optimize away a couple of bytes per transaction and thus they must normalize the balances every 3 years at current 100% annual growth in the money supply.

The reason I was aware of this optimization is I had read about some of Graphene's design decisions back when I challenged the claim of 100,000 TPS and they admitted it was only about 100 - 1000 TPS unless they had very tight control over the witness hardware. Remember I was the (one of the) guy(s) who first exposed that 100,000 TPS lie/hype last year.

What is the bottleneck between 100-1000 and 100k?

(ps, your voting power is almost constantly maxed out... vote some more )

That not every witness has the same level of ultra expensive hardware and connectivity. That was the case for a more decentralized assumption where witnesses (delegates) could come and go. But Steem appears to be a whale controlled blockchain, thus they can probably make sure the witnesses have a certain consistency of performance so as to handle higher transaction rates. But you are losing persmissionless quality.

If CPU is an issue, tapping GPU resources might make it pretty affordable to scale. All it'd take is a bounty to make the proper port to offload processing resources.

[FandangledGizmo]

Can someone please tell me how much money Steem has given away to bloggers thus far?

Double the amount of Steem Dollars outstanding -- $1.4 million -- is a reasonable ballpark estimate, so roughly $3 million.

Thanks.

https://steemd.com/distribution

So $3,000,000 ÷ $40,000 = $75 per signup

Active accounts are usually measured after 30 days, so we can say precisely but looks like active accounts are 1/5, so $375 per active user. Assuming your estimate of expenditures is correct.

It is roughly on par with advertising for signups:

https://www.flirtbox.co.uk/free-dating/2015/10/31/free-dating-sites-vs-premium-dating-sites/

Yet the money is going in users' pockets. So I'd say that is a positive. And half of the expenditure is locked up for 104 weeks minimum, i.e. isn't really spent cash.

That's still up to $30 000 of expenses per week and there's only circa $200 000 buy support for Steem & declining...

(Perhaps speculators have realised there is no actual business model or revenue source other than diluting them at >1000% more than the daily rate crypto speculators are traditionally willing to pay even on Poloniex https://poloniex.com/lending#BTC )

[iamnotback]

IMO this lady should have earned more and she is a resource that is being wasted because she seems very motivated:

https://steemit.com/@phanie90

More and more evidence that Steemit's userbase does not synergize with Asians at all:

https://steemit.com/@gennie

https://steemit.com/@jenmolon

[iamnotback]

jcalfee appears to be a good programmer. Just glancing at his code. He appears to be using all the tricks, such as generator functions and I he hates noise same as myself noting he uses no superfluous semicolons at the end of lines:

https://github.com/steemit/steemit.com/blob/master/app/redux/TransactionSaga.js

I haven't studied this code deeply, but I presume they are using Node.js

[r0ach]

There's my post on why it's very difficult for anyone to get a scam label to stick on Steem.  The initial distribution doesn't bother me that much because I've always looked at proof of stake as being issuing shares of a private company in the first place and not being in the same category as Bitcoin.  It's basically just a company using the blockchain for something and not a Bitcoin competitor.  They compete more with Reddit, Twitter, and Paypal.  

It's only when people like Ethereum start claiming it's a replacement for Bitcoin does it become a problem.  They're two completely different things.  Steem issued the shares via PoW and mined them themselves as a legal loophole instead of IPO.  Normal companies wouldn't give out any shares for free, so it's whatever:

https://steemit.com/steem/@r0achtheunsavory/how-people-make-big-bucks-on-steem-and-why-nobody-can-get-a-scam-label-to-stick

[jwinterm]

There's my post on why it's very difficult for anyone to get a scam label to stick on Steem.  The initial distribution doesn't bother me that much because I've always looked at proof of stake as being issuing shares of a private company in the first place and not being in the same category as Bitcoin.  It's basically just a company using the blockchain for something and not a Bitcoin competitor.  They compete more with Reddit, Twitter, and Paypal.  

It's only when people like Ethereum start claiming it's a replacement for Bitcoin does it become a problem.  They're two completely different things.  Steem issued the shares via PoW and mined them themselves as a legal loophole instead of IPO.  Normal companies wouldn't give out any shares for free, so it's whatever:

https://steemit.com/steem/@r0achtheunsavory/how-people-make-big-bucks-on-steem-and-why-nobody-can-get-a-scam-label-to-stick

I mostly agree, except they advertised in their threads, "no instamine, no premine, no ninjamine, totally fair!", when they instamined 80+% of the PoW stage. Now they tout their service as a decentralized mecca of free and fair discourse. Of course it's not decentralized - he who controls all the coins controls the blockchain in (D)PoS, so control of the blockchain is completely centralized. Additionally they have granted/instamined themselves the vast majority of voting power, so they mostly determine who gets the big payouts. It is a corporate token, but they pretend that it is some decentralized fairly mined coin, and ultimately I think that dishonestly is what will prevent the system from really catching on. Scam or no scam, I don't think you can blatantly lie to the people that you are hoping will use your service in this age of everything being recorded for perpetuity in a web archive somewhere.