Today I want to explore the idea of automatic Steem Distribution, inspired by a post from @kevinwong from 6 months ago: https://steemit.com/idea/@kevinwong/automating-steem-s-distribution
Like most Kevins proposals, wouldnt work. haha :D
jk. But really, i dont believe it can work.
People will be people and this thought experiment if implemented would make STEEM into the worst Oligocracy the world has ever seen.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Individual curation is completely ineffective and a waste of resources, unless partially automated through autovoters, but the "choice" aspect needs to remain. Complete automation through a system Kevin wrote about is silly and a terrible idea.
I dont agree that Steem is uninspiring. I think its the complete opposite. Steemit.inc on the other hand is a bit slow.
Steem is actually close to perfection, if taken into account whats out there, its the people that suck.
Every quality piece has that opportunity, thus the "perfection" claim.. The problem is again that people suck.
Whales suck at curation (and i mean they are atrociously bad), most of them that is, and only the curation initiatives like curie, ocd, even dtube to a degree are what you could call effective at what they do. That isnt the fault of Steem.
I could count on the fingers of one hand the individual curators that are efficient at curation. Kpine being one, Ftg the other, Vortac, Blocktrades from time to time and maybe 1 or 2 more. Even Bernie does token distribution quite well.
Others fall into Flavor of the month account upvotes, lazy coffee break upvoting, they fall into the trap of skipping posts that "might be earning a bit too much in relation to others" if the poster isnt well connected..
There is this philosophy, and i think you might have noticed it, that not one account on the whole blockchain, under 10k or so SP stands out even in the slightest in long term per post rewards no matter how much value they create..
Thats the mentality of keeping those that dont have a lot of SP from standing out..
Take a look. Who the highest payed minnows are... Its those with Dtube+kpine upvotes and thats as far as they will ever reach. Thats the peak.
Steem currently isnt creating a single standout creator. Not a single one. That is because of the reasons above. Individual curators are mostly bad at what they do and the quality gap between those that are rewarded the most is so large, due to "no one person can break reward limit regardless of quality", that its literally ridiculous that they earn the same.
So yeah, there is opportunity, its just that people suck.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Unfortunately your view is very shortsighted and you just cant see whats behind your arguments.
STEEM is the best version there is. There is no platform out there that is better then STEEM at what STEEM does.
You make all these claims: "This needs to happen, if only this changes, when this happens....etc."..
Yes. Youre right: If only everything worked like its supposed to then everything would be better.
It would wouldnt it. Unfortunately it cant. STEEM isnt poorly designed, its just that people are people.
When you provide freedom for people to do what they want, then some people will act in shitty ways.
Your other alternative is restricting behavior and no one wants that.
There is probably not a single thing that you can change with the code of STEEM to make curation preferable, change people behavior.
And thats the truth.
Kevin is trying to do that with his proposal and that proposal will make things many times worse.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
All youre doing is making claims from a behavioral perspective.
Yes they do. So you want to get rid of DPOS?
What do you get then? Better curation? No you dont. Same behavioral patterns start popping up.
Maybe you want to get rid of the monetary aspect?
Nah. The biggest aspect of social media is behavior and there is absolutely nothing that will change there.
Whaleshares removed the ability to delegate as a way to stop bots. They essentially removed freedom of doing what you want with your money. Did it do any good? No. Because people now sell their votes on Bitshares.
Steem is not a closed system and the only thing you can do is ban behavior. That will never happen.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
As i said. You provide restrictions as the solution. Are you saying that Narrative isnt more restrictive then Steem?
Whats their draw for big investors?
Steem is a token redistribution platform and has the potential of building a whole society on it. You just pointed me to a blogging platform.
If you come up with something better feel free to let us know. Hope you strike it rich.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
But it actually already works as automation has already proven. Exponential empowerment means a sharing economy where people have access to so much excess power that it would work. Automation that already is happening proves it works. As we are moving from Market Capital economy to Social Capital economy
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Automation with choice works to a degree. Across the board automation would not work. This essentially creates a governing body of high stake holders and increases dependence on them drastically. This would lead to massive coruption. Curation projects would stop existing since individual content evaluation would stop.
Personal choice as a member of a curation project of what you think deserves or does not support would stop existing.
Not to say that this would eliminate individual contributions to projects, create conflicts on what is and what is not value.
An algo cannot determine value, only people can. And they have to do that individually.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This already exist in the offline world as regular jobs, moderators becomes like job managers. Automation happens after a human have seen a source of consistency in quality.
The key is that most content and theme the future creation can be predicted. For example I know @silentscreamer will do a specific thing in same level of quality. So automation of value happens in that direction. Freeing up Humans to focus on other areas.
Automation shows sources in a network trust each other to automate power. So yes the need for people with high moral standards needs to be pushed forward to lead the way.
I don't need to for example evaluate a source if I have months of proven track record. This means Humans can truly focus on just creating more value in the network. Only have to oversee once a month to see things are running fine.
So the interface scan a screen will not be needed anymore. This way a Human can have 10x more time to do what they love and improve stuff. Making Steem just 1% of their life.
Exponential cost efficiency. Humans getting more value and abundance over can create a positive feedback loop of more awesomeness. But it's not ready at the moment for this. Would need 5 more years of empowerment to see where things are heading.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
But thats not really the automation Kevin talks about. If you have moderators adjusting the system then youre really just improved on the current system of "automated choice curation."
I agree that things should get more automated, but a individual choice needs to continue to exist. You cant base everything on an algorithm across the board and hope for a consensus on value prior to content creation.
What i think youre proposing is a more efficient and advanced "steem-voter" type use... The proposal as i understood it from Kevin is based on creating an algo to determine whats value, quality, etc... That wont work imo.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Future Technology will be exponentially better so eventually that will probably work too, but I get what you are saying
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm open minded to see various systems be tested out. I may also be wrong for sure. But I think a big beauty of humans is to be able to trust them and love them. And I seen that it can work amazing. I think humans are geniuses when they come together and empower each other
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I thought you didn't like automation with regard to curation in a video a while ago, you wanted to be in sole control of your curation? We are really passionate about automating curation by using steemauto as it helps us to act out and work towards fulfilling our mission!
How are you getting along with your own token? What do you see the best case scenario with that being?
Best,
@charitycurator
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit