It is painfully obvious from Steem HF 23 and the "100 days of Steem" that Steem has no devs.
All they can do is copy/paste what Hive does.
It's not necessarily the better project that will come out a winner in terms of monetary value but the project that is backed by the people with serious marketing and financial firepower.
This point is extremely rooted in the idea of corporate competition and competitive capitalism.
The way these networks are designed is to build value from within,
rendering all preconceived notions of the legacy economy obsolete.
Even using this logic, why would anyone with "serious financial power" enter a network whose fate is tied to the whims of a single individual (especially one who has been shown to hold contempt for the very network that they own)?
I'm not going to pretend to know how this is going to turn out, but it will certainly be interesting.
I think things will be a lot more clear a year down the line.
I keep thinking of Microsoft and Apple that have reached a point of outright conning their customers because their customers are loyal come whatever may. Backdoors exist, shady production methods, all sorts of red flags with these companies, their leadership and working conventions and still they are hyped beyond belief and are everywhere.
BTC may be technically way inferior to the other blockchain projects of later generations but it does have market leader advantage despite the technicals.
Don't get me wrong, I am the first to acknoledge we need to get out of our obsolete financial conditioning, to design structures where cooperation trumps competition and where voluntary projects are materialized because people who work on it want the best not only for themselves but for everyone involved (i.e. the wider network).
The issue remains that anyone with financial firepower, malign interests and questionable networks of business connections can undermine projetcs and turn them into a pile of garbage - and still make them big and successful (thereby stealing the vision if you will). The merging and monopolization of media companies in the US would be a prime example.
That said I do want to focus more on "building value from within" and concentrate less on the scenarios that may or may not come to pass with Steem. It just kinda gripped me like an obsession because it's just such a thriller. hehe.
100 days of steem is just freakin' creepy ;)
Thanks for your take
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The thing about Web 2.0 and the legacy economy is that anyone who builds anything of value needs to capture value from their product. Otherwise they won't make any money.
With crypto and Web 3.0 this is no longer the case. If you have a big enough stake in a decentralized product you can simply create value for the product and you automatically make money (and so does everyone else). Over the next ten years it will become much more obvious that the business models blockchain can get away with are completely incompatible with how corporations, governments, banks, and all other centralized agencies do things.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit