100 Steem Bounty: What is the solution to a lack of SMT development?

vimukthi (73) · 6 years ago

Adding another blockchain to the equation can complicate things way too much.Working with Byteball or possibly for interoperability is cool. If it's like news sites embedding Twitter/Instagram links onto their pages and news sites sharing their content over social media, that's great. But if they start depending on each other too much, that will add too much complexity, moving parts and more things to understand for the DAPP builders.

As per one of the polls I had on dpoll, taking beneficiaries or having few ads is the preferred method.Some have expressed that theyare simply happy about Steemit Inc self voting themselves for funding purposes. @steemchiller is already using this method to fund steemworld.org

Steemit Inc is also in a position to pull off something like what Brave/BAT is trying to do. I first bought this up regarding @dlike https://steemit.com/dlike/@vimukthi/will-dlike-replace-voting-bots-in-future-a-modest-proposal-for-rewarding-content-discovery-and-incentivized-curation Steemit could ask users to opt in for ads and share 10%-20% of their ad revenue with users. Steemit.com Alexa rank is at 3,790 and in South Korea it is at 569. This is much higher than most crypto news outlets. Steemit can also vet for the quality of the ads creating a high quality ad ecosystem.

They will gain their revenue in fiat. So there won't be any added sell pressure on STEEM. Revenue sharing with STEEM users would mean:

People have incentive to join STEEM to get a piece of that revenue enhancing adoption.
Rewards will be given in the form of SP which will help the smaller accounts to do more transactions.

You might find this interesting: https://steemit.com/blockchain/@bobinson/use-cases-for-steem-blockchain

@dragosroua made a post saying that we could be seeing a demo version of SMTs between 3 and 6 weeks. Let's hope this will actually happen.

@steemmonsters have shown that we can do a lot on STEEM without SMTs or even smart contracts. There are some other great projects around too. This may seem like a crazy idea. But a slightly re-designed UI and a solid marketing campaign could help both the short term price and long term user base and business interest. Even stupid rebradings have created lots of hype in some projects. I don't think our marketing message is loud or aggressive enough. Nobody really talks about STEEM outside of STEEM. Steemit Inc should try to fix this.

$0.33

8 votes

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

I think it would be good for steemit to actually take some beneficiary fee, as this would allow others skins to compete with steemit and a better UI to evolve ultimately.

vimukthi (73) · 6 years ago

To me not taking beneficiaries and minimalism are the two main selling points of Steemit.com for me. Even 10% beneficiaries would only mean a small portion of the reward pool as @akomoajong mentioned. But I do agree with the UI competition thing. Most people just use Steemit because they are just used to it like how people use Google for their searches.

$0.00

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

I think it is hard to conpete with steem ui because what is the business model. If you can have some of the rewards then there is a model.

So i think this could create income for steemit and strengthen the ecosystem by creating better UIs

$0.00

akomoajong (66) · 6 years ago

I totally agree with your points 💯 but I will choose having ads over taking beneficiaries because the beneficiaries wouldn't yield income with the current low prices of Steem.

Yeah, Steemmonsters too another great influence. We need more of such initiatives.

Thumbs up man!

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

steem-bounty (72) · 6 years ago

@knircky has set 100.000 STEEM bounty on this post!

Bounties are a new way you can earn rewards irrespective of you Steem Power. Go here to learn how bounties work.

Earn the bounty by commenting what you think the bounty creator wants to know from you.

Find more bounties here and become a bounty hunter.

Happy Rewards Hunting!

$0.28

16 votes

karchady (53) · 6 years ago

Hello good afternoon Steem-bounty I still do not understand very well how is the process of profit with you vote as Witnesses. and I will be supporting what they bring to offer to the Steemit community regarding the rewards of steem I also wanted to carry out a project on this platform, it really lacks a lot of support from the community but I think specifically I am pointing my finger with you the steem and according to that in steemit they reward contents that are not original but little by little it is seen that they only have skills for competitions to win steem easily and not to undertake in the life of the steem. I'll be glad to read them.

thedarkhorse (67) · 6 years ago

Because I don't feel that SMT's are going to be the end all be all anyways and only offer support to a very limited amount of use cases based on the white paper my current project has decided that we are going with issuing our own coin on another network. We will sort of be doing what you are suggesting with #2, but not exactly.

Currently the biggest issue is everyone wanting to use the reward pool to fund their little projects is a real issue. To much of the reward pool is needed to fund these apps and more apps added ends up spreading the pool to thin. Even at $3 steem it's still an issue as the developers need fiat to pay the bills and will create constant downward pressure on Steem. With this in mind I started trying to come up with a solution.

I am in the process of working on something that will not pull from the rewards pool in the least, but instead add value to the blockchain by bringing in outside fiat on what I imagine will be a daily basis. All bills will be paid from our fiat revenue and no need for steem for funding. This will be a real live company that will also lives outside of steemit, but use Steem as a payment option for those who want to earn Steem. The other option will be our own coin, but as that coin will be treated as a stable coin I'm guessing that many people will opt for Steem for the upside potential. These coins will need to be purchased by the company to then pay those who earn them.

A key point is this will live outside of steem and attract new people to Steem. People who never before owned steem will be exposed to free lighting fast transactions. This should help bring in new users to Steemit and more important for value new holders of Steem.

Not going into to much detail on purpose, but giving enough to hopefully let you know there are things in the works that can potentially be game changers for Steem and it's purely about Steem being a currency without worrying about the reward pool in the least.

$0.28

11 votes

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

Even at $3 steem it's still an issue as the developers need fiat to pay the bills and will create constant downward pressure on Steem

This is a flawed circular argument. If STEEM is at $3 that means that buying support is in balance with selling pressure at that price.

Regardless of who gets it, a lot of the reward funds get sold. It really doesn't matter, in terms of selling pressure, whether that is developers or bloggers. If people think that developers getting reward funds is the best way to make Steem increase in value then it should be done. Let traders worry about selling pressure, which will happen anyway.

The biggest issue right now is that the reward pool is dysfunctional and a huge and increasing portion of it is going to nothing but SP holders voting for self-enrichment.

$0.12

therealwolf (75) · 6 years ago (edited)

Well, inflation is kind of a debt, meaning it does reduce the value of the previous tokens. If developers would be given tokens, which in return strengthen the ecosystem and increase the value of Steem, then this would be a positive return, instead of rewards being sold by cat-sharing bloggers (extreme example).

The biggest issue right now is that the reward pool is dysfunctional and a huge and increasing portion of it is going to nothing but SP holders voting for self-enrichment.

But stakeholders are the ones having their money staked in a system. I do agree that the reward pool needs a downvote pool to make sure the rewards are given to the right people/content, but I don't think it's worse to give rewards to stakeholders instead of people who have no stake, post subjective content which is often times of no real value and then sell it.

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

If developers would be given tokens, which in return strengthen the ecosystem and increase the value of Steem, then this would be a positive return, instead of rewards being sold by cat-sharing bloggers (extreme example).

I'm a bit confused. This is exactly what I was suggesting. Perhaps you are agreeing?

I don't think it's worse to give rewards to stakeholders instead of people who have no stake, post subjective content which is often times of no real value and then sell

Nobody wants that except maybe the people posting the cat pictures. But as I said less and less of it is even going to that, at the cost also not going to developers.

$0.06

therealwolf (75) · 6 years ago (edited)

I'm a bit confused. This is exactly what I was suggesting. Perhaps you are agreeing?

Yes, you're right. We agree on it! :)

Nobody wants that except maybe the people posting the cat pictures. But as I said less and less of it is even going to that, at the cost also not going to developers.

That's sadly true - not that many developers are on Steem, but I've got faith in utopian v2 bringing more devs to Steem to help shift the weight.

$0.00

rantar (58) · 6 years ago

Thanks for bringing up the downvote pool. I hadn't thought about that for a while, but I can certain see the benefit of a separate pool.

$0.00

freddio (61) · 6 years ago

do you think a downvotepool makes sense? I think the way a downvote pool can get abused, has the power to destroy steem.

Think about a voting service with downvotes ( or some big holders play censorship, with stuff they dont like) .

In my opinion 75% currator /25 author is way better.

2 Reasons: Holder need to spend money for steem.

Holder need to read allot of stuff before he find high quality content.

In my opinion it is way more work to find good stuff as to write.

And as a side effect less holders think about "they loss money" if there upvote some stuff.

I have post about some days ago here: https://steemit.com/steemit/@freddio/author-coin-the-solution

And about cat pics,

I think as a social Media platform, people should post about what there like.

For sure it sucks, if a cat pic has 100$ rewards, but i think a Blacklist and remove bought votes should be way better.

$0.00

freebornangel (73) · 6 years ago

but I don't think it's worse to give rewards to stakeholders instead of people who have no stake,

Kinda puts the lie to 'spreading the coin to the most people', huh?

$0.00

thedarkhorse (67) · 6 years ago

Trust me I get the economics that are required to reach $3 and how that would include the selling pressure from app devs. But there is no question that app devs that are relying on income from the reward pool to pay the bills will always be pulling value from the system. We need cash to flow into the system each day just to stay even due to the inflation and reward pool.

With an approach that allows for outside money to flow into Steem and Steemit there can be real value growth.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

I'm all for outside money flowing in. But you missed the point I was making. As long as we have a reward pool that is usually turning into selling pressure we might as well give to devs who create selling pressure and add value by building a better ecosystem rather than give it to people who create selling pressure without building a better anything.

But there is no question that app devs that are relying on income from the reward pool to pay the bills will always be pulling value from the system

This is what I dispute. If there is a reward pool then the selling aka 'pulling value' happens regardless. It doesn't only happen when you award the money to devs.

If your proposal is to shut off the reward pool in connection with some other changes to improve the overall economics, I'm open to looking at that.

$0.00

thedarkhorse (67) · 6 years ago

This is what I dispute. If there is a reward pool then the selling aka 'pulling value' happens regardless. It doesn't only happen when you award the money to devs.

We have ventured way off topic here. But in terms of outflow of steem creating downward pressure on the markets I'd be really curious to see where it's coming from. I'd guess there is way more downward pressure from those running apps trying to pay the bills then from individuals who currently are trying hard to power up before the next run in price.

When you have to pay bills with the reward pool money each week you will be selling no matter the price to cover those bills. As the price has dropped the required amount of selling pressure has increased as it's constant in terms of dollar amount needed to pay the bills.

Next you need to look at the upward pressure created by the devs and individuals. Who do you think buys and powers up more steem over the last 90 days. Also would love to know that.

Wonder if someone that is good at pulling data can figure that out.

Anyways I believe that by allowing more accounts to grow faster we would be far better off then subsidizing apps with very little user base.

As long as we have a reward pool that is usually turning into selling pressure we might as well give to devs who create selling pressure and add value by building a better ecosystem rather than give it to people who create selling pressure without building a better anything.

Problem is the key point to any social media site is that the People are the Value. All the apps in the world mean nothing without users. So those people that you feel aren't building a better anything...they really don't need to as they are building a better steemit just by being active (assuming they aren't content thieves, spammers, or scammers). If people want steemit to become mainstream they need to get over the idea that posts need to be amazing long form content, it's not what people want to produce or consume. If long form content was what people wanted twitter, Instagram, facebook, and all of the other social media sites out there would look a whole lot different.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

subsidizing apps with very little user base.

Definitely not in favor of that.

So those people that you feel aren't building a better anything...they really don't need to as they are building a better steemit just by being active

The actual value of an individual social media user is quite low. For example, last I looked Facebook generates revenue of about $40 per user per year. So yes, I think it is reasonable to pay people just for being active, but not unlimited amounts. In fact on Steem a very large portion of the reward pool goes to a small portion of users. Most of them are not building anything of enduring value, and they are being grossly overpaid for being active.

(assuming they aren't content thieves, spammers, or scammers).

Yes that describes a lot of them in broad terms. Or simply overpaid.

get over the idea that posts need to be amazing long form content

I certainly did that a long time ago. In fact I never believed it.

$0.00

thedarkhorse (67) · 6 years ago

I think you and I are on the same page. Just about the wording more then anything. Everything you just wrote I'm in complete agreement with.

Not looking for people to be over compensated, but feel many times the wrong people are being compensated.

We do need to figure out how to let new accounts come online and actually function. I run @pifc and we do a weekly curation contest (week 35 now) and it needs to be people who are reputation score 55 or under that get featured. So we see a lot of newbies come and go...and see the issues they deal with. RC's have really messed with the ability of a new person to actually use steemit.

Some have speculated that there will be pools for RC's down the road where a community can allow it's members access to the use of the RCs it has to help smaller members function. This would be great if it happens as any account with over 500sp probably never needs all of their RC's and they go to waste.

$0.19

4 votes

smooth (70) · 6 years ago

There has actually been some development on the RC pools, so it is a little more than speculation, but I have no idea if or when it will be completed and released.

$0.00

Show 2 more replies

awesomianist (64) · 6 years ago

I'm aware of the comment thread that follows between you and @thedarkhorse. Though I'd like to butt in and give my crypto-newbie opinion if that's at all considered.

It sounds like we're taking the assumption of "just sell it in the exchange" for granted. Has the possibility of using Steem/SBD as a medium of exchange been totally scrapped in the zeitgeist of major Steem holders?

What if I one day offers a fiverr-type service to be paid in Steem and only steem, would that sound positive or laughable?

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago

Not laughable at all. If a fiverr-type service that used Steem as its currency got big enough that would be great. In essence that's what all the Steem-based apps are trying to do in their own ways.

$0.00

awesomianist (64) · 6 years ago

I daydream about people using Steem/SBD (maybe not SBD yet until it's a properly functioning stablecoin) for real-world interaction. While I'm code illiterate, I still want to find ways to make myself useful to Steem not just as a hodler. Otherwise the thought of "Steem is only valuable by selling on exchanges" is depressing af.

$0.12

hr1 (59) · 6 years ago

The biggest issue right now is that the reward pool is dysfunctional and a huge and increasing portion of it is going to nothing but SP holders voting for self-enrichment.

I couldn't agree more. The mechanism of incentivizing search for good content via the prediction game + curation rewards never really worked. Very small fraction of (arguably) good content gets rewarded, which in turn makes looking for it unprofitable. We at Steeve are trying to change that.

Here we described how. What do you think about this approach?

_{Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface}

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago

I welcome new tools and initiatives but I don't think most of this issue can be addressed without changing the core incentivization model that is built into the blockchain.

$0.00

hr1 (59) · 6 years ago

Why is that? Where do you think is the problem with curation or what do you think would have to change?

_{Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface}

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

The incentives for self-voting and vote selling are too strong. Without addressing this, much of the inflation as 'wasted' and we end up with the perceptional and market disadvantages of high inflation without the benefits of a large treasury going to uses that actually help improve and grow Steem. Community initiatives (that I've seen so far) can only address this to a relatively small extent around the edges but don't get at the core issue.

$0.00

hr1 (59) · 6 years ago

You're right, self-voting incentives are too high and it's a big problem. On the other hand, curation never really worked even before the introduction of linear reward curve and consequent spread of self-voting.

So even fixing this wouldn't fix curation. For that, I argue, you need 1) better content discovery, so that people are able to actually find the good content even from unknown authors - this is a necessary condition for curation which has never been satisfied on Steem. Without it it's just circle jerking of known authors who have no competition and thus no incentive to continue writing good content 2) start rewarding the good content, not just good authors - this will incentivize both the creation and curation.

_{Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface}

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

Introducing linear isn't the only reason for self-voting and vote-selling. In fact incentives for high stake accounts or for methods of paying to concentrate votes were even higher under n^2. Making the payouts linear flattened the incentives but it really only did so by moving the too-high incentives from one group to another. They remain too high, but perhaps in a somewhat more fair manner (i.e. too high for everyone).

There have always been methods of finding valuable contributions, such as sincere efforts by large curation guilds, paid curators, and individual stakeholders interested in doing it. Maybe these would break down and/or need to evolve if the volume increased say another order of magnitude or more, but that has never been the issue we have seen in practice. It still does no good if the incentives don't support finding and sending rewards there once it is found, and they mostly don't.

The only method I know of that could possibly address the incentive issues (outside of a complete structural redesign) is strengthening and normalizing downvotes. You can't usefully downvote yourself and you can't really concentrate the rewards with them either. It is a bit like giving an executive a line-item veto but not the ability to spend money on his or her own. I can't say for sure it would work but it at least has a chance. There is a good deal of opposition though (in part because the 'normalizing' part requires a painful shift in cultural norms).

Unless we can try something (arguably) radical I don't really see curation having much of a future on Steem. Hopefully Steem can evolve into something else useful, like a neutral substrate blockchain for communities and tokens with their own methods of distribution.

$0.00

akomoajong (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Well, I think you have made cited out brilliant ideas but below are my points and suggestions;

I had been thinking that maybe Steem Inc should consider implementing a cut on payouts rather than implementing ads (which is the suggestion of many) but I have come to realize that Steem seems to be a dead bead at the moment and would not generate much income that is needed. So, maybe ads might helpful and preferable.

Moreover, Ned did transfer all his Steem holdings to an exchange, I think bittrex. I am kind of wondering the fate of that huge amount of money presently.

Also, With some witnesses already talking about disabling their witness thread due high cost of operations and maintenance, I feel it is time to make some adjustments to the rewards for witnesses located outside top 20. As an example @fbslo did complain with this post

Talking about a consensus voting on which project to support and how much money to be allocated to a project sounds a brilliant idea and might be for those who are running a project or those who plan to run a project on the steem blockchain. I think Ned and Steemit Inc cannot accept to be part of this because they might feel hard done if their project is not approved. Taking his project "Destiny" as an example, he is yet to reveal what it is all about and how he plans to go about it.

Moreover, when you mentioned other blockchain, Tron comes to my mind and this is definitely because of the recent Twitter blast. I cannot my place my hands on how Steem can operate in conjunction with another blockchains without having disruptive problems in future. But if all this is possible, this might just be a perfect solution to this SMT stories.

Thank you for this opportunity to express myself.

$0.24

10 votes

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

I am in the same boat as a witness that cost me $200 a month and generates less than $30 a month.

https://steemit.com/steem/@daan/seriously-considering-leaving-steemit-reaction-to-ned-s-responses-to-paulag

akomoajong (66) · 6 years ago

Oh! That's bad and yeah you (@steem-bounty) occupy one of my slots.

Also, I stumbled on this article and I think it will interest you based on the purpose of this post.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

rantar (58) · 6 years ago

I don't think you necessarily need a separate blockchain in conjunction in parallel with Steem while you wait for SMT. With the recent announcement, I am currently working under the assumption that SMTs will show up eventually. I guess we'll just have to wait until January to figure out if SMTs are just empty promises.

Assuming SMTs are coming, then a simple database level tracking of each Steemit's users tokens can work. Obviously, the trust will have to be there since we'll have a lot less visibility into what is happening behind the scenes of these tokens or what will happen upon SMT conversion. A couple of examples of systems already using this are Actifit.io and Partiko. Both have an internal token tracking system without an attached blockchain. Both tokens don't directly have value, but provide some type of benefit to users. Actifit's "tokens" seem to be factored into individual votes while Partiko's can be spent to get upvotes on a post. I feel investing in separate block chains at this point would be a poor choice for the limited time. If SMTs get put off indefinitely, then the whole block chain is probably in trouble.

I know it's probably not the most exciting solution, but the intermediate step of tracking tokens and waiting for SMT to come online seems like the safest choice.

$0.13

apshamilton (64) · 6 years ago

@fulltimegeek has just posted that he has a solution.

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.11

intellihandling (63) · 6 years ago

Dear @knircky, the situation in Steemit is total confusion and after @ned say they are firing 70% of workers the Steem price is continuosly falling down. With such price it is very appetible to buy some, but the main problem is that @ned is making a lot of shit to the community with his behaviour. People like you, @crypto.piotr and many others are trying to make Steemit better, but if there will be no a connection between whales like you to try to convince @ned to sell Steemit to someone who can drive it better, we will be destined to loose all our saving. I hope you can do something with some your friend to avoid it...:(((

$0.08

7 votes

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Hi @intellihandling

As always very supportive! :) I cant wait to get to know you in person buddy (ps . what is your real name?)

It's very kind that you mentioned my name. Appreciate.

Have a great weekend ahead,
Yours
Piotr

$0.00

intellihandling (63) · 6 years ago (edited)

Dear Piotr, my name is Marco!
I support you because you became a member of @steem-bounty family and because i like what you are doing for Steemit, of course when you will be in Poland somehow we will meet...:)))

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

I know we will @intellihandling :)

I can't wait to get to know you in person.

$0.00

n1hal (54) · 6 years ago

I think there should be a split in the rewards pool at some % which is specifically divided into three parts-developers,advertising and then comes stake holders, incentives and blah blah blah.

I always feel that any company or project cannot succeed without advertising. I accept it that the rewards pool should be much more minute than the other two but just tell me how often do you come across advertisements while browsing or watching videos. Really rare or mostly never except some shit ICOs and some good ones as well. I think a temporary referral system will also be helpful. If you think advertising companies don't like it. The point is we need more roots to the Steem ecosystem. Yep it is true people add value to the ecosystem. No need to connect to other side chains and stuff. We also have to help developers by opening up a donation dApp. @knircky has created Steem-bounty to increase interaction just like that we need something through which we can directly donate to developers and I also wish developers can be helped in promoting their posts so that they get the whole support and also criticism from Steemians about a project. I think increasing the payout period from 7 to 10 or 12 will help cut down Steem outflow. These were my opinions. I welcome criticisms and appreciations equally. Thank you!
Bi

$0.04

metama (71) · 6 years ago (edited)

So ... @ned doesn't want to spend the bank on SMT development ...
but a lot of us Steemians want it ... and would benefit from it ...

do you think @ned would be mad if we just got it done??? He would benefit from it too...

Aren't there a bunch of devs on the platform ... and a bunch of whales?
Couldn't we just use @fundition to raise money ... ??
Step 0: Create group of individuals passionate/committed about creating SMT's ( ... Council of Elrond style)
Step 1: Create framework for dev. of SMT's
Step 2: Define cost basis for creation
Step 3: Launch crowdfunding campaign w/ checkpoints based on dev. milestones
Step 4: Crush it??

Now ... I'm not a dev ... so I have no idea how complex this would actually be ... however I can assume that there are a semi-fixed number of steps between now and having SMT's on the blockchain. I also know that there are a lot of people that want to see SMT's happen for various reasons. I can then safely assume that there are potential future scenarios where we successfully work together to accomplish said goal.

Why don't we try it?? I'll throw some Steem and labor hours.

Plus ... if we accomplish it we will all make a lot of money and then we can throw a big party!! Boat's and hos for all!!!!

akomoajong (66) · 6 years ago

Lol I kind of wonder the fate of the huge amount of Steem he transferred to an exchange with message "hiding my Steem from public view" lol

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

metama (71) · 6 years ago

did ned do that?

$0.00

freebornangel (73) · 6 years ago (edited)

How about a fork?

One fell swoop, and the n2 comes back, the ninjamine is locked pending contingencies, the Steemit account fights abuse, and everybody gets their coins doubled.

Bare in mind that there are more witnesses outside the top 20 than in it, and the possibility of a certain few running rpc nodes for cash is a real thing.

We only lack assurances that we can get listed on the exchanges, which may not come until after the fork is stable, anyway.

With all the ned delegations out of the pool everybody's vote value goes up, too.

ats-david (74) · 6 years ago

what do we do if we need SMTs but they are not coming.

Why would you need SMTs if they don’t yet exist? Why are projects making plans for SMTs when 1) they have not been created and 2) they have not been approved by witnesses?

I’ve seen people claiming to have one of the “first SMTs” since they were announced well over a year ago. It’s just not smart to plan a project around them when we have no actual reliable info about what they’ll do and we’re relying on them being delivered by a company that consistently fails to deliver.

And in my opinion, SMTs are not needed and will in fact do more harm than good. There are bigger problems that need to be corrected instead of fixating on ICO hype that peaked a year ago. I think it’s time to give up the pipe dream and move on to more practical things.

midlet (72) · 6 years ago

While on the one hand I like the potential upside of SMT's. This is also a good point. If magically SMT's were released tomorrow in all their glory, the only thing we'd be depending on still is hype. There wouldn't be some sudden inflow of EARNED cash. People would still need to then build solid and stable businesses which if they REALLY wanted to and had the ability to, they could do right now with STEEM.

I think people have convinced themselves that SMT's are the second coming of STEEM, but I think we might be better off just focusing on creating a coherent user experience that can be sustained and maybe I dunno...earns some money?

$0.14

ats-david (74) · 6 years ago

What a novel concept! To use the Steem currencies and blockchain to build things instead of trying to cash in on ICO hype from last year!

Where do I sign up?

$0.00

https://steemit.com/steemit/@ned/rocksdb-and-smts-announcement

rentmoney (68) · 6 years ago (edited)

@knircky, Ned Made an announcement today regarding SMT.
I am not sure if you seen it yet or not but below is the link.

For me ( @rentmoney ) I don't think adding more tokens is the solution for Steem success. As noted in Ned's previous announcement there was a massive lay off in the steem team. Currently Apps / extensions are using Steem resources for free. Nothing is free in this world and if someone wants to run an app / extension then they should contribute to the bills. Placing adds up would go along way as well to bring in revenue. New users need more room to post and comment, the RC system is too restricting. Simplify the user interface. Sometimes less is more.

$0.02

ulqu3 (66) · 6 years ago

@rentmoney I concur. Trying to force a load of projects on the Steemit ecosystem to "add value" may ultimately result in disappointment given the type of overemphasis being placed on them right now.

$0.02

thedarkhorse (67) · 6 years ago

Ads are the solution to a lot of problems. I don't get everyone that feels ads are evil. Just ignore them and make them so they can't grab any personal information from the users and who cares if there is a header ad we need to scroll past to get to the main content.

$0.00

rentmoney (68) · 6 years ago (edited)

Agreed, I think what some fear are an abundance of adds.

$0.00

thedarkhorse (67) · 6 years ago

For sure everything becoming a huge billboard would be annoying. But with targeted ads in a few key places there can be revenue without annoying the users and slowing down the experience.

$0.02

intellihandling (63) · 6 years ago

Dear @thedarkhorse, i would have an idea to not make invasive ads as choose to see them or not; if you have enoght RC you do not need to see them so you can select no ads, but for whom have no RC and SP watching some ads can be good to recharge them power in order to be active member of community. After HF20 Steemit become an elite platform, no spam, no user without power, so if this is Steemit is not my place...:((

thedarkhorse (67) · 6 years ago

I love the reduction in spam...that part is great. But something needs to be done to help the small guys out. I currently am giving away 50sp delegations to small accounts to help them with the RC issues.

Personally I think ads for all unless they want to pay to remove them.

$0.00

akomoajong (66) · 6 years ago

I agree with you @rentmoney ads will go a long way to help the situation at hand.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

rentmoney (68) · 6 years ago

I think we will end up having them. While there are some that are negative to the idea there're also plenty that seemed to have warmed up to the idea.

$0.00

akomoajong (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Yeah you're right. Taking beneficiaries rewards and putting up ads are the two points being raised and argued upon.

Steem is currently low in price and for me, beneficiaries wouldn't yield much to cover the costs.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

Yep I am aware! I still think additional efforts other than steemit are required to move this blockchain forward and wanted to hear what others have to say about it.

therealwolf (75) · 6 years ago

Let Steemit Inc do their job to develop SMTs. I don't see a point right now in debating other alternatives.

However, I see value in bringing the discussion to having a decentralized reward & fund mechanism for development purposes.

$0.00

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

How would we go about making such a thing happen?

$0.00

prameshtyagi (71) · 6 years ago

Agree

$0.00

frdem3dot0 (58) · 6 years ago

Please have a look at this recent post which partially answers your question.

Directly on topic I think that it is time for steemit to step back and leave the development to us. The way to finance it could be done similar to bitshares. There inflation is looked up in a fund and stakeholders vote on projects that this should be used for. Then these are implemented and funding is unlocked. It is an interesting idea.

We already have a similar system here in the form of witness votes. I suggest to set (passive) inflation to 0% and use this to increase witness funding. Then we as a community demand that witnesses not only maintain the chain but also commit to implementing features. We choose what we want with our votes.

Of course this can be corrupted by selling witness votes. But I think there is no way around this problem. Stakeholders need to realise that it is in their interest to fund development, especially when their stake is looked up for roughly 2 month.
People that do not contribute and hope that others do the work for them can be brought back in line when the community agrees by removing support.

But apart from all of these technicalities, I think that we are held back by the idea that steemit should do the development. We are steem, we decide and we develop. Steemit is welcome to join, but they should not have a special role.

$0.00

newageinv (70) · 6 years ago

I like the idea of the development fund! The concept is similar to a thought I once commented here after Hard Fork 20 in that the blockchain Dash has a similar mechanism in that every block mined segregates a portion to a pool for the development and marketing of the blockchain. This could not only help with SMT development but other key future developments that will be needed to continue to support the ecosystem.

However, the short term seems to be more of a focus due to the market conditions we continue to witness. I would propose a SMT for the key infrastructure needs that the ecosystem currently needs. I am not a technical expert but have read that running a full node among other infrastructure requirement are expensive. We should decentralize it completely with a DAO/DAC (Decentralized Organization) that issues SMTs to fund the infrastructure. The organization will then earn revenue by charging for access to its services which are then used for its maintenance and continued development and growth. Services could be paid in the SMT and net earnings less a development fund fee would be distributed to SMT holders. Just a thought despite not knowing much about the technical aspects of it all.

$0.00

prameshtyagi (71) · 6 years ago

Good idea

$0.00

cloudblade (69) · 6 years ago

Development Fund is a good idea.
What Fund is more good?
I think to be competition Fund, such as "Nobel Foundation" "Le Guide Michelin" "Oscar Awards"
International reputation - World identity - celebrity - Red star - chasing Star
life of people, What is pursuit? Only both - Reputation and interest.
So me say more good fund is competition Fund.

$0.00

chekohler (70) · 6 years ago

If we are going to think about an alternative to SMT I'd say both ideas are options, I just feel that one shouldn't be mutually exclusive of the other. A combination of the development fund + steemit inc looking at private investment + perhaps help from another blockchain in the interim is also an option.

Regarding the fund, I just think that getting buy-in from enough stakeholders takes time and yes its beneficial for the ecosystem in the long run but by the time it takes to campaign you could have spent that effort raising private funding.

Leveraging another blockchain just seems like duplicate work to me, id rather bite the bullet and go SMT first time if that were my two options

Another option is creating a centralised service that dapps can run on in the meantime and they are sync'd to the blockchain at a later stage. The service can come at a fee to dapp creators since they get the benefit of access to the steemit community!

$0.00

fitzgibbon (61) · 6 years ago

Let's remember that things look bad now mainly because of general crypto market conditions. No one predicted the total market cap of all crypto assets would be below 120B in December 2018. And yet here we are.

I would say, for those that are able to develop and build great things, build them on Steem. For those that are able to contribute and add value to the Steem community, keep doing so and keep engaged. For those that invest in Steem for profit, accumulate now.

Remember that Steem is still one the fastest, most powerful and most engaging blockchain application in the world, hugely undervalued and with massive potential. As always in the crypto markets, the situation will change with time, even when doing nothing radically different, the value of Steem will fluctuate and probably upwards from here. With Steem at $4 or more, things look radically different.

So what do we need to do?

Simply ride the storm. No fear. Steem on.

$0.00

ulqu3 (66) · 6 years ago

Life has a way of fixing these things. I think we should have a little more faith in @ned and the team. Actions speak louder than words.

$0.00

ljmm (44) · 6 years ago

First of all I want to thank for the system that for months I have experienced that is the steem-bounty and for its new system that I am knowing, now with respect to the post I want to say that I think it would be a good idea to create in steemit an exclusive label for themes and projects that seek to facilitate money gains for users, since I believe that one of the problems that steemit has and can be addressed so that customers find more easily what they are looking for is that there are exclusive labels for what they are looking for, at least for have SMT that many users do not know what it is that it would be good to have an exclusive label for that, how can be earned and projects that seek that one win that, I think that trade would improve in steemit if there was better organization in the labels and that just like the discord there is a limit of channels where you publish what you do, I think that it would be easier to find content like this on criptomone labels das or digital economy

$0.00

kingscrown (81) · 6 years ago

i think making tokens on BTS aka bitshares is the answer... its same technology

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago

I could see this work with a HF that distributes some of the inflation money for development and a way for SP holders to vote on who shall receive the funds for what projects.

How does this differ from the existing system where anyone can post a proposal or status report and SP holders can vote on how much funding they receive?

$0.00

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

Umm, I am not aware such a system exist for steem. Or do you mean the general reward system of steem?

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

What I described (which as far as I can tell is equivalent to what you proposed with some gloss changed) is exactly the general reward system of Steem.

anyone can post a proposal or status report and SP holders can vote on how much funding they receive

$0.00

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

Ok, but currently the most amount of money one can get is a few hundred $ for a post, so how are we going to fund something that is like 0.5% of a quarterly reward pool?

One cannot fund development by announcing a post about it?

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

Post daily/weekly/whatever status reports? (As someone voting for funding I'd definitely prefer this over giving money with no ongoing transparency over how it is being used.) Or campaign posts or comments ("vote this post/comment to support @knircky's development team"). Etc.

There are certainly ways to do it.

A large part of the low value of posts is the price of STEEM and would carry over to any mechanism. It wasn't long ago we saw $800 posts regularly (and even larger before that).

$0.00

frdem3dot0 (58) · 6 years ago

I agree that this is possible, but I think it is slightly abusing the post feature. Posts are for all kind of things and development of the underlying chain is a rather specific task that should have a separate income stream, not competing with pictures of cats and funny memes.

The problem is that money received on posts depends a lot on your popularity and ideas from less know authors have a huge change of going completely unnoticed. If we separate them from all of the rest and set aside a second small income streem (set by witnesses), this can be avoided.

But the most important thing is that we need to change our mentatlity. So many people here think that steemit is responsible for the development and we need a change of this culture.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

Posts are for all kind of things and development of the underlying chain is a rather specific task that should have a separate income stream, not competing with pictures of cats and funny memes.

Yes all kinds of things, including developers. Maybe we should instead dedicate a 'small income stream' to cat pictures and use the rest for developers.

But the most important thing is that we need to change our mentatlity. So many people here think that steemit is responsible for the development and we need a change of this culture.

Steemit is responsible for development. Do you think it makes sense for Steemit to assign itself 80% of the initial stake via a ninja-mine and then not be responsible for development? What was the ninja-mine for? If the answer was putting money into Steemit's owners pockets and then getting to the point where we invite the 20% to pay (again) for development then we should all just recognize we have been played and move on to a new project with lessons learned.

The problem is that money received on posts depends a lot on your popularity and ideas from less know authors have a huge change of going completely unnoticed

How will this differ in new mechanism? Won't funding go to the popular devs and ideas from lesser known ones have a huge chance of going unnoticed (or noticed and unfunded). Or worse, where big stakeholders (say those with an 80% ninja mine) vote for themselves to get funding and then accomplish little or nothing.

$0.00

prameshtyagi (71) · 6 years ago

Steemit is responsible for development. Do you think it makes sense for Steemit to assign itself 80% of the initial stake via a ninja-mine and then not be responsible for development? What was the ninja-mine for? If the answer was putting money into Steemit's owners pockets and then getting to the point where we invite the 20% to pay (again) for development then we should all just recognize we have been played and move on to a new project with lessons learned.

Agree

$0.00

Show 3 more replies

frdem3dot0 (58) · 6 years ago

Yes all kinds of things, including developers. Maybe we should instead dedicate a 'small income stream' to cat pictures and use the rest for developers.

I see the problems, but I think that development of the native chain and posting are really two very different things and I dont know what the advantage to throw them into one box would be.
Posting is a feature of the chain, development of the infrastructure is there to realise these features.
We would still be able to controll the funding via our witness votes.

I think implementing a clear separation between these is well motivated.

Steemit is responsible for development. Do you think it makes sense for Steemit to assign itself 80% of the initial stake via a ninja-mine and then not be responsible for development? What was the ninja-mine for? If the answer was putting money into Steemit's owners pockets and then getting to the point where we invite the 20% to pay (again) for development then we should all just recognize we have been played and move on to a new project with lessons learned.

I do fully agree. But we cannot impose there to be a special actor that is doing what is right because we want it. In the end steemit will use their stake to make profits just as anyone else. We can hope, but it seems they are failing. The best solution would to get them to burn most of their tokens and then step out of the way. That wont happen so we have to find a way that seems realistic, or simply power down and leave to find a competitor where not 30% is controlled by a single entity that has a questionable vision for the future.

How will this differ in new mechanism? Won't funding go to the popular devs and ideas from lesser known ones have a huge chance of going unnoticed (or noticed and unfunded). Or worse, where big stakeholders (say those with an 80% ninja mine) vote for themselves to get funding and then accomplish little or nothing.

Stake abuse cannot be prevented. Not now and probably not in the future. We have to hope that locking up funds for some time gives people a more long term position and have tools to drive out black sheep (crab in the bucket).

There might be some advantages and the funding structure for development should be different than for posts, but this quikcly becomes messy. So I think the psychological change would be the main driver. Just as the inflation is. When people vote, they are in fact giving money away, but because it is an inflation they dont realise it as such.

But the fundamental problem remains. And that is linked to steem not really having a logical business model with a natural flow of resources. Nobody agrees where the value is coming from because there is no satisfactory answer. Game theoretically steem is not solid and this is the root of all these discussions. In order to move on we need to find an honest vision for the future and real revenue streams instead of magic money.

$0.00

Show 4 more replies

freebornangel (73) · 6 years ago

we should all just recognize we have been played and move on to a new project with lessons learned.

Is the code archived in the GitHub?
Can we roll the code back, or does stinc hold the keys to the memory hole, too?

It doesn't appear to me that they intend to correct the wrecking of the n2 and the instigation of proof of wallet.

My comment elsewhere in this thread.

You don't leave the cancer cells to kill you, if you really want to live, imo.

At what point will the arrogance and ignorance become a nail in their version of steem's coffin?

$0.00

Show 4 more replies

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

I think this is impractical for a development project. I think some other process of asking for and getting money approved is required i think.

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

I must disagree. In fact it has been proven as practical by several development projects that were funded that way (when the value of Steem was higher). It isn't exactly a development project, but @burnpost raised well over $100K using daily campaign posts (again when the value was higher).

It is all about where stakeholders want the rewards to go (which in turn depends on what they are convinced is going to increase the value of their investment), regardless of the mechanism.

$0.00

knircky (73) · 6 years ago

Fine, if that is your opinion.

I feel that with lack of leadership from steemit other processes are required.

$0.00

Show 1 more reply

cjturtleman (46) · 6 years ago

Very disappointing :( SMTs were surely a big part of the reason STEEM shot to $8.

$0.00

botefarm (67) · 6 years ago

From the little I know you're trying to see SMT has the end of steem, No, it isn't, after SMT there will be still more development going on, many projects are still coming on board this steemit ship.

Now to your question, with Development Fund and Using other Blockchain, Steem can decide to use any of them, don't forget that this is a decentralised platform where voting has to be done.

Don't forget that Steem is yet to roll out so many plans to generate revenue or bring it to the table of the common man, those on the street, become a mainstream blockchain outlet with its fast transaction speed as an edge. By the time steemit becomes all this, trust, you wouldn't be asking this question anymore because business would have opened here and there and they'll surely be monetise.

chrisaiki (63) · 6 years ago

Bitshares has been offering everything we need for user tokens. We don't need SMT.

$0.00

diogosantos (62) · 6 years ago

SMT´s might not come, but @ned just introduced smt-lite, which, by this time I´m sure you already read the post.

#1 "HF that distributes some of the inflation money for development and a way for SP holders to vote on who shall receive the funds for what projects." Implemented with a certain % is the way to go... I agree!
We need to make our processes more agile, and keep moving/supporting great ideas/projects that want to help STEEM reach another dimension.
#2 "Use some other blockchain token in conjunction with steem?"
For this I see a big problem, STEEM blockchain tried super hard to establish an image of an independent blockchain capable of surviving alone if all the others failed. By saying that I mean, we need to put our "ego" behind our backs and start being humble.
Maybe with the help and the vision of a different blockchain we can "cook" something great for the future.
#3 As many might know, I´m not a creator/entrepreneur, so I´ve never tried or plan to create a project here or anywhere else. So all I say about this subject is based on a personal opinion that is built from reading a lot of posts like this, where people with the right knowledge share and make me learn.

$0.00

arslan786 (61) · 6 years ago

Why don’t steemit increase the payout as weku is doing like on weku you can get 0.40 $ vote per 200 wp but on steem we have 0.01 per 200 sp.
So if the payout increased, the new users will be attracted and in this way steemit can make its way to the top again.

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

d-pend (73) · 6 years ago

The only reason this is the case is

1.)There are less users on WeKu, so you have more influence over the rewards pool compared to STEEM.
2.) WeKu shows posts in WKUs (Internal units,) not fiat currency. So you can't really compare the two in the first place unless you calculate in STUs (STEEM Internal Units.)

$1.07

4 votes

prameshtyagi (71) · 6 years ago

Not a good idea. It will increase supply of tokens and thereby reducing value per token

$0.00

arslan786 (61) · 6 years ago

Yeah you are right but the value of tokens is already low and it is getting lower and lower. So I think they should take this risk once. Maybe it can make something to steem Blockchain.

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

hi @arslan786

I think that @prameshtyagi had a good point. That would only damage current price even more. No doubt about it.

Cheers
Piotr

$0.00

arslan786 (61) · 6 years ago

yeah I agree.
Thanks for your valuable comment.

$0.00

https://steemit.com/steemit/@ned/rocksdb-and-smts-announcement

lighteye (71) · 6 years ago

So now that we know that SMTs may not come at all or maybe in a limited way, my question really is: what do we do if we need SMTs but they are not coming.

Fresh road-map is here, and it says its coming:

Livestream is rescheduled…

https://steemit.com/steemit/@ned/today-s-livestream-rescheduled

…but the expectations are still very high:

$0.00

prakashghai (63) · 6 years ago

SteemTRON

$0.00

sanees (54) · 6 years ago

project fund is great. What is the value of SMT in any case. Any new product could have still used steem. I think that whole concept was based on flawed ICO mania. its gone!!!!

$0.00

Saint Nicholas challenge for good boys and girls

steemitboard (66) · 6 years ago

Congratulations @knircky! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You received more than 10000 as payout for your posts. Your next target is to reach a total payout of 20000

_{Click here to view your Board of Honor}
_{If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP}

Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:

You can upvote this notification to help all Steemit users. Learn why here!

$0.00

Saint Nicholas challenge for good boys and girls

steemitboard (66) · 6 years ago

Congratulations @knircky! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You received more than 35000 upvotes. Your next target is to reach 40000 upvotes.

_{Click here to view your Board of Honor}
_{If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP}

Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:

You can upvote this notification to help all Steemit users. Learn why here!

$0.00

beggars (64) · 6 years ago

Why do you think SMT's aren't coming? @ned literally just posted an update on the timeline. Yes, they're releasing a lighter version of SMT's to begin with, but they didn't say they're not coming, this is a feature we've known about since the beginning.

SMT's are happening and we honestly just have to be patient and give STINC time to finish them. We've waited this long, what's a few more months? It's almost 2019.

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 6 years ago

I am totally for a development fund, for this and more.

In my opinion, the success of Steem requires that SteemIt Inc has competition regarding development

$0.00

arcange (73) · 6 years ago

Congratulations @knircky!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:

Pending payout - Ranked 7 with $ 171,3

$0.00

nildighonto (50) · 6 years ago

$0.00

maquemali (62) · 6 years ago

Hmmmmmmm.. its hard to think and decide at the moment. With @ned latest announcement, it got half the community panicking a bit.

Why is Steem so low? Where is SBD again? What will happen this time? Who gest affected more? Is RC gonna be more restricted??....blaah blaahh blaahh.. the list could go on.

For us little rwd fishes, we have no choice but to wait and see.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

ropaga (56) · 6 years ago

If Steem Inc is not able to launch tokens, another project may do that. There are many dApps active and if they unite they could achieve that, either directly from Steem blockchain or creating their own fork.

For example there is the vaporchain protocol. I have not found any additional information about that so it may be just a smokescreen.

I agree about the development fund. Steemit client may charge some type of tax, that way the use of other clients would be promoted and the revenue can be used for development tasks.

$0.00