As a minnow my simple question is, Why don't everyone - community, witnesses and STEEM Inc take this opportunity to create a truly decentralized, community driven project by introducing a QA process which will be independent of the blockchain development ?
Projects like https://everipedia.org/ can be very easily be done on STEEM & there are numerous smaller projects (say https://dock.io/ ) which can be very easily implemented on STEEM as opposed to certain other PoW chains. STEEM has a very solid foundations and I think its possible to bring smart contracts & Turing Completeness to the system making it possible to become a general purpose blockchain which also supports content.
The Goals can be formulated from the witness testaments regarding HF20 written by the witnesses and numerous people.
A DAO can be created and this can do the following but not limited to it:
- help the developers to run the TESTNET
- ensure that the code has enough test coverage
- maintain the CI-CD pipeline
- generate transactions mimicing the MAIN-NET
- publish test reports on a periodic basis
- help to bring in bug bounties
- create a code of conduct
- Attempt to join various blockchain consortiums
- work with Academicians in research
A starting point can be using something like https://gitlab.com/SBCDAO/
There are numerous models like wikipedia, OpenStreetmap etc which was also able to financially succeed while being completely community driven.
This can be this project's and community's moment to glory.
Takers ?
The question is not about takers @bobinson, the issue is of implementation of the ideas. I think everyone will agree with what you are saying here (have no reason to see why not) but then that does exactly what @berniesanders is saying - take power from few and distribute to the whole; which, incidentally, may not be something that powers to be want to do..
So, then the model needs to be strong enough to incentivise them to move ahead as well... Or we will remain stuck where we are. Not many I care for the world guys out there, hey?
I hope some sense will prevail.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Completely agree.
What if there are few crazy people who thinks knowledge is power and unites to do this ? I have no interest in becoming top 17 (ie, one of the generals/witnesses who can prevent or make a fork & mostly NDAs etc will mostly prevent me from one of the 17). I would say, this is a selfish effort to learn about how CI - CD can be implemented on a public chain and also in the process learn more about kubernetes. I have few college students who wants to learn DevOps and I want to learn about kubernetes and containers in general.
so, this is a selfish act which may have the following impact.
Acts that one performs For one's own sake Should also aim for the good Of other men
There are few university students also around, this can be a great learning for them too. Also the usage of the word "I" in this reply is to emphasis the "selfish" motives.
Will there be takers now who fits this description ? :-)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hey @bobinson, I know you can pull this out and there would be mighty many to help, as you have rightly pointed out. My understanding thus far, pardon me for that, was that any changes to the core block or the platform (if I may call it so) will not happen without the buy-in of Steemit Inc and the top 20 witnesses... I guess, I am right on that (or am I?).
If so, no matter how many good people and crazy minds we will get, the implementation would just not happen. If that is so, wouldn't the changes need to have a buy-in by Steemit Inc. and our top 20 witnesses? Only then will it be implemented. In such a scenario, how much leverage do we have to make them buy-in? That was my question.
If it can be done nothing like it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you for the confidence shown, not this becomes a responsibility from which I can't run away!
You are correct in all your points and I think Steem Inc should be seen as the "(Benevolent dictator)" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship] & in this case they have largest monetary stake - IMHO the best course is to support them as opposed to influence their decision making.
See the following:
https://steemit.com/steem/@ned/re-develcuy-re-ned-re-ned-re-sapphic-re-ned-re-ats-david-re-steemitblog-hf20-update-restoring-continuity-20181001t004731785z
I think,
Whether Top 20 or the Steem takes up is upto them. But there are people like @reggaemuffin who has published how they will test : https://steemit.com/witness-update/@reggaemuffin/witness-statement-for-reggaemuffin-proposing-hardfork-adoption-requirements
There will be more people coming up with guidelines and this will eventually lead to change.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In that case, @bobinson, I hope so too it happens fast. It is needed.
The issue is that many of the top 20 and Steemit Inc. seems to believe that their hold will go-off if opened up to the community. I think they need to understand everyone stands to benefit if we improve the platform and not to mention the additional money that they will make... Like I said before, hope sense prevails!!
Enjoyed interacting with you @bobinson. Hope to hear more from you. Definitely few of the sane minds on the platform!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You are a good thinker and for that reason you have my minnow witness vote.
I think you will get lots of support if you can help us get some of this started.
Our biggest obstacle right now is complete miss-micromanagement of the entire blockchain by a single person.
I can not prove it but it seems he controls who is a top witness and has the biggest stake of steem held by anyone. I am pretty sure he is @freedom @pumpkin and those two votes lock up most of the top 20. All the @steemit, @misterdelegation accounts are also controlled by him.
Right now the entire blockchain is at risk of destruction by one person.
Until we can remove that power from one individual, this project is more centralized than any fortune 500 company or the worst socialist government in the world.
Until that changes we are all at risk of our investments of our time and money just vanishing with the next "cool" idea he thinks of.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you!
Now, responding to your points is very tricky as this will put me either in the down vote list of community or the business. Now, one thing we all (you, me, community, witnesses, Steem INC, investors) all have in common is the greater good for the blockchain. Its good for everyone to have a small pie of a billion dollar blockchain than a million dollar blockchain.
As the blockchain grows, the following happens
So, I would tend to think that maintaining a top 17 (not 20) is perhaps a normal thing in a DPOS + Stake scenario like ours to ensure that the chain is never split and the direction from the founding team is achieved. So during the initial token supply was formed, the split might have done in a very careful manner to make sure that the long term objectives are met.
Most important objective of the company obviously will be to protect the interest of the investors IMHO.
The developers have done an awesome job at churning out code at a rate rivaling chains with bigger net worth. So if a team and company can do the difficult part of writing some of the most complicated code ever written, I would trust STEEM Inc with their decisions on how the initial token supply was done. Even with the process flaws that we have been mentioning, there was no attempt to fork the chain - so I would say, the checks in place is working.
Community can help the community first by implementing collaborative tests, once we have more code coverage and experience I believe the company will notice and take PRs and contributions. I would personally trust 2 of the top developers (in terms of their code contribution to STEEMIT) over anyone else as "code never lies" and not disrupting the business decisions and direction, there will be definitely a way to add more value to all the stake holders.
Its a win - win for everyone.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You had my reply at the introduction of the idea in #witness-social and thank you for tagging me in the vetting of the idea. I saw your points later after my random nap, regarding hub vs lab, and they are well taken. I'm mostly ambivalent about the choice, only wanted to be able to tie to same usernames and stuff relating to live issues and PRs and things in linked reference, which, with a couple browser tabs and cut-n-paste links, can be done anyway, so there's that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you!
pointing out few more points also for clarity and for everyone's understanding.
The most obvious reason is the support for CI and CD + kubernetes which will fit into STEEM Inc's AWS based workflow. (I assumed it from various details not 100% sure). With Github in the long term it may be possible that microsoft may bring in their Teamfoundation (TFS) workflow but not sure about it. Its also possible to integrate Gitlab to Rocket chat via hooks ( https://rocket.chat/docs/administrator-guides/integrations/gitlab/ ) so that we will get a Github + Slack like experience. (Being said all this, my personal favorite among gitlab, github & phabricator is the last one)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Shameless plug, we don't need just a regular Wiki on blockchain like Everipedia on Steem, and we should be more creative than that; thus we have created https://hede.io Knowledge Sharing Dictionary to have Wikipedia's aim, Urban Dictionary's structure and Reddit's content. While few people can understand its benefits, we have had the passion for managing it and we believe that it is a key project for knowledge sharing and perfectly fits the Steem API.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I fully support this idea.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thank you!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Excellent suggestion. When do we start?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Right now! Once the CI is there, may be others will also join ?
Few steps I can think of are :
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
When we stop blaming each other and see the actual hard work and dedication that this chain requires. Talks contribute a little on ground level and many of the suggestions don't even get attention. Sitting on the side line and blaming people in the mainstream wont going to work out. We all have to do this, we all have to understand this. @bobinson did a great job and he brings a lot of idea that can actually bring some value to this chain. Again the decision remains in the hand of top level.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I support this idea with all VIOLENCE :) Could be a game changer. How can I help?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Good suggestion Bobby. Without a proper QA process, we will not be able to mitigate similar issues in future from happening. I completely agree with your idea.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
followup : https://hackmd.io/s/ByT1BuG5m
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit