HIVE 추진측의 뻔뻔한 거짓말들

glory7 (80) in hive-101145 • 5 years ago (edited)

3일 전 하이브 발표하면서, 하이브 진행 프로젝트를 진행한 메인 증인 blocktrades의 인터뷰가 실렸습니다.

링크: Steem Community Plans Hostile Hard Fork to Flee Justin Sun’s Steemit

중간에 이런 부분이 있죠.

For this initial hard fork, one key thing will change: The tokens from the original development fund controlled by Steemit will not be carried over to the new chain. Everyone else's will be ported over.

하드포크에서 변경될 한 가지는, 스팀잇 소유의 개발 기금 토큰들은 새 체인으로 넘어가지 않을 것이다. 모든 다른 사람들의 것은 넘어간다.

뒤에 확인되듯이, 거짓말입니다. 자기들 마음대로 이상한 규정을 정해서 에어드롭을 제외하죠.

그리고 또 거짓말입니다. 여기서는 안 넘어간다고 해놓고, 실제로는 하이브에서는 스팀잇 재단 계정의 스파를 자기들이 대신 관리하겠다고 합니다.

그리고 자금은 어떻게 댈 것이냐는 질문에는, 본인이 직접 올린 포스팅에서 이렇게 말합니다.

링크: Why I won’t be compromising with Justin Sun

Does the community have the resources to launch a blockchain?

Yes, we do. It’s actually much easier for us to launch a chain, because of the many lessons we’ve had operating the Steem blockchain. And as far as financial resources go, several prominent Steem stakeholders have privately offered both computing resources and significant financial support, including my own company, BlockTrades. Even at this early stage, I’m utterly convinced we have sufficient support to launch and develop this new blockchain.

한마디로, 몇몇 자신을 비롯한 몇몇 스팀 주요 홀더들이 재정 지원을 약속했다고 합니다.

여기서도 스팀잇 재단 소유분을 지금 스팀에서 SPS 쓰는것처럼 자기들이 멋대로 쓰겠다는 말은 하나도 없죠.

자, 실제로 어떻게 되었나 볼까요?

그 다음날 나온 hive 명의의 공지에서는 없던 조항이 갑자기 추가됩니다.

The only accounts who will not be included in the initial airdrop are those containing the Steemit Inc ninja-mined stake, and those who actively contributed to (and publicly declared support for) the centralization of the Steem Blockchain.

에어드롭 제외 계정이 스팀잇 재단 보유량에 갑자기 "스팀 블록체인의 중앙화를 지지한 사람들" 이란 조항이 들어갑니다.

없던 문구가 추가된것도 이상하고, 이렇게 조항이 애매한 것도 이상하죠.

궁금해서 댓글로 물어봤습니다. 구 증인파 열성 지지자들이 와서 비난하기 시작하더군요.

그래서 내가 뭐 못 물어볼 거 물어봤나? 하고 댓글 리스트를 보니, 이미 neoxian 등에서 똑같은 질문을 했습니다.

영원히 댓글에 대한 대답은 없었고, 하드포크 11시간 전쯤인 오늘 정오 무렵 깃헙 코드가 공개되었습니다.

https://github.com/openhive-network/hive/blob/0.23.0/libraries/protocol/hardfork.d/0_22.hf

여기에 보면, 저스틴 계정들을 제외하고 에어드롭 제외 계정들이 쭉 나열되어 있습니다. 제외되는 조건은

Accounts excluded who voted a minimum of two sockpuppets or proxied someone who voted a minimum of two and who didn't unvote before the hive announcement with more than 1k sp

2개 이상의 저스틴 증인 계정에 투표했거나 그런 계정에 프록시를 주었고,
하이브 발표 전에 투표를 취소하지 않았으며,
스파가 1천 이상.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

대체 이런 어이없는, 말 그대로 주관적이며 랜덤한 기준은 대체 누가 무슨 원칙으로 세운 것이지?

그리고 이게 공개되면서 화제가 됩니다. 어이없다는 주장이 꽤 많았구요.

어디서든 열성 지지자들의 목소리가 큰 것처럼 저런 댓글들에는 마치 다 하이브 찬양하는 방향인 것 같지만, 실제로는 그렇지 않죠. Splinterlands 디스코드만 가봐도 한국 유저들을 저런 기준으로 제외하는건 어이없어합니다.

설마 저걸 저대로 실행할까, 하는 생각을 하면서 일단은 기다려 보았습니다.

하이브 포크 돌아가고 나서 확인해보니, 진짜로 안 줬군요. 와우.

탈중앙화를 명분으로 삼는 자들이 자기들 입맛대로 몇명이서 몰래 중앙화되어 결정을 하고

검열에 거품 물고 반대한다는 자들이 자기들 의견에 찬성하지 않는다고 검열해서 에어드랍 배제하는군요.

진짜 어이가 없어서 헛웃음이 나올 지경입니다.

마지막으로 스팀잇 계정 소유 스파. 이거를 배제하는게 주 목적이라고 그렇게 말해대서 당연히 소각하는줄 알았습니다.

그런데 하드포크 몇 시간 전에 미디움을 통해서 발표한 것에는 내용이 다릅니다:

링크: Press Release: The New Hive Blockchain is Launching, Here’s Everything You Need to Know

One of the most important and exciting features of the Hive blockchain is the trustless “Decentralized Hive Fund” (DHF) development model which allows community management for a portion of the airdrop earmarked as development funds. To maintain the overall supply of Hive at the same level as Steem for launch, a portion of HIVE tokens will be airdropped to the Hive dev fund to create a robust resource pool for decentralized development. These funds will not be usable during the launch period until a future Hive hardfork upgrade is deployed to continuously liquefy the tokens over time to prevent market flooding.

출시 때 총 하이브 발행량을 스팀 발행량과 맞추기 위해서, 하이프 펀드라는 곳에 에어드랍 안한 물량을 다 넣어놓겠다는군요.

말이 애매하죠? 그런데 잘 생각해보면, 에어드롭 안한 물량은 저스틴 계정 물량과 자기들 지지하지 않았다고 빼겠다고 한 계정들 (glory7이라던가...) 물량입니다. 달리 말해 그걸 소각 안하고 자기들이 보관하겠다는거죠. 그리고 나중에 SPS처럼 개발기금으로 쓰고.

이거 관리는 누가 할까요?

당연히 구 증인들이죠. 한마디로 저스틴 것을 뺏아서 자기들이 관리하겠다는겁니다.

아래 달린 댓글 중 하나가 제 반응을 그대로 대변합니다:

So you guys are taking the ninja-mined stake and using it? LOL.

그러니까 너희들이 닌자 마이닝 물량 가져다가 쓰겠다는거지? 아 웃긴다.

탈중앙화를 외치는 자들이 22.2 소프트포크도 그렇고 이번도 그렇고 대놓고 자기들끼리 커뮤니티와 아무 논의 없이 정하고,
검열 저항을 외치는 자들이 지들 멋대로 자기들 전적으로 지지하지 않으면 에어드롭에서 제외하고,
2~3일전 공지한 것을 바로바로 말 바꾸고.

이런 쓰레기같은 자들이 지금까지 메인 증인들입네 인플루언서네 하면서 스팀 거버넌스를 이끌었다니 기가 막힐 따름입니다.

hive-101145 sct-kr sct-invest zzan palnet steemleo mini dblog kr sct

5 years ago by glory7 (80)

$30.82

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!

Sort Order:

Trending

[-]

steem-ua (64) · 5 years ago

Hi @glory7!

Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 5.438 which ranks you at #424 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 1972 places in the last three days (old rank 2396).

In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 74 contributions, your post is ranked at #22.

Evaluation of your UA score:

You've built up a nice network.
The readers like your work!
Try to work on user engagement: the more people that interact with you via the comments, the higher your UA score!

Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server

$0.00

[-]

falledsta (37) · 5 years ago

쟤들 하는거보면 중학생 정도의 생각을 가진 사람들 같습니다.
일단 저 사람들 스팀부터 못 팔게했으면 좋겠네요

$0.00

[-]

nonsowrites (70) · 5 years ago

You have steem what do you beed hive for please?

$0.00

[-]

pangoli (69) · 5 years ago

Who gets to decide? You? The witnesses? Or the community?

This whole thing appears like a few people at the top controlling the general narrative because they have all the influence.

What they've done here is simply deny people of their rights because they had the slightest moral reservation about freezing someone's stake. I see no decentralisation in this.

$0.00

[-]

nonsowrites (70) · 5 years ago

What they've done here is simply deny people of their rights because they had the slightest moral reservation about freezing someone's stake. I see no decentralisation in this.

What silly right are you talking about? So if i and a group of people decide to fork out today what moral obligation do i have to give everyone my token? Do you understand the point of a fork is to move away from steem?

Their right?! That word irks me. Steem and hive are not one. Many when you lot being to understand that the better. What are you saying guy, this makes not sense, i am even trying to rationalise this.

You see no decentralisation? Well thats why the they have steem.

$0.00

[-]

pangoli (69) · 5 years ago (edited)

So if i and a group of people decide to fork out today what moral obligation do i have to give everyone my token?

How did you get to choose?
Who decided? The community? Or a few people.

I said 'right', because they still have access to their exact account on the new chain. Why did the token balance change for a few people? Who got to decide?

If you simply cannot understand that all of these decisions were taken without your input, then I'm sorry, you don't know what you're preaching yet.

$0.00

[-]

nonsowrites (70) · 5 years ago

I said 'right', because they still have access to their exact account on the new chain. Why did the token balance change for a few people? Who got to decide?

Simple: the people who created the new blockchain. And many people support this new blockchain. Those who don't can simply stay back and build on steem. It's that easy.

If you simply cannot understand that all of these decisions were taken without your input, then I'm sorry, you don't know what you're preaching yet.

What's my input? Did I create a new chain? What was my input in bringing about the reality that is HIVE? I have simply chosen between two products--steem and hive. This blockchain was created without your input, steemit decided to mine without your input. You came here, saw the product, liked it and decided to be part of it. What do you understand decentralization to be? Maybe you should start from there.

$0.00

[-]

pangoli (69) · 5 years ago (edited)

What's my input? Did I create a new chain? What was my input in bringing about the reality that is HIVE? I have simply chosen between two products--steem and hive.

So, in essence, you do agree that these decisions have been taken without the input of the community (which includes you)?

This decision was made to fork off the community from a tyrant. Yet, this decision has decided to deny a targeted few community members of their stakes on the new chain.

Is the "community" fine with that? Or they simply have "no input" because they didn't fork the chain. Yet they raise the flag of decentralisation up high?

$0.00

[-]

nonsowrites (70) · 5 years ago

So, in essence, you do agree that these decisions have been taken without the input of the community (which includes you)?

What are you saying this guy? Youre smarter than this. The hive community only existed yesterday, so how in God's name would a consesus be reached about a blockchain that did not exist? How please? What voting parameter would be used and on what blockchain? Prior to yesterday, only a steem community existed, a group of people did not want to be part of that community so they ceded, created a new blockchain. This was a possibility and it was disccused several times. Do you understand the fact that it is not stipulated anywhere that a consensus must be reached before a group cedes? Do you know about bitcoin and its forks like bitcoin cash? Did the general bitcoin community decide to fork? And when the fork happened did every member of the bitcoin community get bitcoin cash?

targeted few community members of their stakes on the new chain.

What in God's name are you saying?! This is freaking insane! Their stake? Did they work for it? Did they buy it? The airdrop was basically an incentive to those who did not vote for the sockpuppets. A simple code. No one was handpicked. Do you even understand what youre talking about?

Is the "community" fine with that?

What community? The steem community or the hive community because if you do not understand that both are different now then there is no point having this discussion.
And before you reply do check the definition of consensus, community and decentralisaton.

Becuaee you fail to understand that consensus doesnt mean every body and a community is basically people with similiar groups and values working towards similiar goals and you also fail to realise that steem and hive are not the same. The earlier you do the better.

$0.00

[-]

pangoli (69) · 5 years ago (edited)

What are you saying this guy? Youre smarter than this.

Ad Hominem. That i don't agree with you doesn't make me less smart.

I don't see any way we would agree on this matter because we've been on different paths since the beginning of it. I have always seen the SF 22.2 as a hostile move, you didn't. So, from your perspective, the witnesses are faultless, regardless of what they do at this point.

In my perspective, however, we fucked things up by instigating the hostility. It's like throwing a bomb first into someone's city to see if they'll react. And when they do, we say they're evil, and that we totally knew they had the intent to attack us from the beginning. The logic isn't consistent with the tenets of Peace.

Talking about this exclusion list, It's so much easier to say all you've said in retrospect. A lot of decisions these days have been hasty on here, without the input of the steem/hive community.

And because of that, a community of people would have to prove themselves on why they're worthy to receive a stake in a new blockchain that has their account and content.

Truth is, if we were really focused on recovering the STINC stake, we really wouldn't have minded that there are a few dissenting voices in the community who didn't agree with the common narrative. It would have been up to them to power-down and leave the hive, or be given the option to not be there at all.

You're under the premise that those excluded accounts shouldn't have disagreed with anything at all. Because every single decision we made WAS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

It's the classic centralized thingy. ''We won't give you a job (even though you're over-qualified) because you did not vote for PDP at all political levels of government. Sure, we know you support a new Nigeria, we also know you don't support censorship. However, you voted for our local government and governorship candidates, but not the president. We're excluding you because of that. And you can swing by the office later to explain why you think you deserve this job.

Consensus is by numbers. The majority. The only reason why the next bitcoin block is added is that the majority of the nodes on the network agree with all the data in that block (creating the longest chain). You talk about a consensus that revolves around a few people. How is that true decentralization? You want decentralization and community decision, let's have this SPS debated on Hive SPS, see what the "majority" of users think about it. That's how you know consensus and decentralization.

Nonso, give it a rest. This is deeper than just codes and consensus. You're dealing with humans. Greed and resentment will always be a factor.

I appreciate your composure in the conversation.

$0.00

Show 2 more replies

[-]

sanscrist (65) · 5 years ago (edited)

사실 저는 중앙화가 왜 나쁜 것인지 모르겠습니다. 그렇다면 대의민주주의가 아닌 직접민주주의를 해야 한다는 말일까요? 전 바이낸스 공매도라면 나름 빠삭하지만, 미국의 총기를 허용해야 할지는 잘 모르겠는데요.

그런데 이 사람들은 직접민주주의를 하자면서 독재를 하고 있는 건가요?

https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%95%A0%EB%A1%9C%EC%9D%98_%EB%B6%88%EA%B0%80%EB%8A%A5%EC%84%B1_%EC%A0%95%EB%A6%AC
아, 애로의 불가능성 정리를 따르면 직접민주주의는 독재이기 때문에 그런가요?

$0.00

[-]

glory7 (80) · 5 years ago

저도 사실 중앙화가 왜 나쁜건지 잘 모르겠습니다. 뭐 탈중앙화를 좋아하는 사람도 있을 수 있지.. 정도였는데, 이번 사건을 보니 탈중이 목표가 아니라 자기들 권력/이권을 놓치기 싫어서 저 프레임을 쓰는 것 같아요.

$0.00

4 votes

[-]

ngc (66) · 5 years ago

HIVE IS ALIVE!!!

JOIN US, YOU'LL HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME BALANCE AS YOU HAVE HERE ON STEEM WITHOUT THE CENTRALIZATION AND CENSORSHIP!!

https://hive.blog
https://twitter.com/innerhive

ALSO, FUCK YOU @JUSTINSUNSTEEMIT

$0.00

[-]

sirvotesalot (68) · 5 years ago

$0.00

[-]

z8teyb289qav9z (70) · 5 years ago

$0.00

Reveal Comment

[-]

shadowspub (70) · 5 years ago

As I understand it, one of the reasons the excluded balances was placed in a fund is to allow those on the list to make an appeal to the community via the SPS to have the exclusion reversed. Post a proposal putting your case forth for why you should not have been on the list.

$0.00

[-]

glory7 (80) · 5 years ago

Thank you for stopping by.

While "appeal" may work out in theory, it would still be seen in practice as a small group of "powerful" HIVE people who made this decision in the first place would "listen". How likely is that they are going to change it? and add the fact that they are controlling this excluded airdrop tokens too. Would they give it up?

And you take someone's token first and ask him to "appeal" for "forgiveness" (this is the word @roelandp used) to get his back. Where is the fundamental rule of presumption of innocence?

Those excluded would likely feel hurt and not want to appeal afterwards. I cannot believe that how many HIVE supporters are simply ignorant of that.

$0.00

3 votes

[-]

ngc (66) · 5 years ago

$0.00

[-]

sirvotesalot (68) · 5 years ago

$0.00

[-]

z8teyb289qav9z (70) · 5 years ago

HIVE IS ALIVE!!!

JOIN US, YOU'LL HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME BALANCE AS YOU HAVE HERE ON STEEM WITHOUT THE CENTRALIZATION AND CENSORSHIP!!

https://hive.blog

<br

$0.00

[-]

shadowspub (70) · 5 years ago

I think there's a basic misconception in thinking there was someone's token 'taken'. Airdrops are not an entitlement, the group making it can determine how they want to do the distribution. I have a token, if I want to do an airdrop only to those with more than 100 of my tokens, I've not taken tokens from those with less than 100, I've chose not to share with them.

I totally understand the feeling of hurt caused by being on an exclusion list. I would feel it as well. I don't much like referring to an appeal as forgiveness however since English is not either your or roeland's first language, is it possible something has been lost in translation?

As I understand it, the appeal process is designed to right any inclusions on the list of those with factors not taken into account by the 'mechanical' process that produced the list.

I understand the hesitancy about participating in the process. I likely would hesitate myself but for those who have been active on STEEM and contributing to the community over the years, I would hope members of the community would speak up on their behalf.