Steem Velocity Hardfork - Hardfork 20

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

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @steemitblog, et al.

So, first of all, like many of the commenters have and will continue to do, thanks for the heads up on the Hard Fork update. This is a worldwide system, so I'm guessing that the 11 AM EST time on a Tuesday is the optimum time to do this?

One other thing. Why the change to 9% rather than the 2-5% for SBD printing. I understand we're at or near the 5% now. This feels a lot like the upping of the debt ceiling the US does constantly to allow more spending on borrowed money. I'm just wondering what the reason is, what's the rationale, and whether or not it's an appropriate thing to do given the safeguards that were originally in place. In other words, what has changed (other than the debt ratio reaching 5%) that will make this change better?

Thank you for the ongoing updates this year, and for informing us of these upcoming changes. I hope all goes well with the implementation of the HF, and that all functions as intended.

$1.15

12 votes

blocktrades (74) · 6 years ago

The purpose of the change was to allow for the creation of more SBD to hinder "pump" attempts that raise SBD beyond it's intended peg value of $1 USD. But it's important to note that the increase in potential SBD doesn't risk the sovereign debt problem that the US has: the STEEM blockchain is designed to linearly stop honoring the ability to convert the SBD to Steem at the rate of $1 worth of Steem when the debt ratio goes above 10%. Think of it like a built-in promise of the Steem blockchain to hyper-inflate SBD's value vs Steem during the period that "too much" SBD is in circulation.

$1.24

11 votes

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @blocktrades. I appreciate the response here.

I was aware of the failsafe for SBDs, so that's good to know that this isn't something that would somehow override it.

Okay, so allowing a higher percentage of debt essentially hinders pumps on SBD because the price drops with more SBD in circulation, so to speak? Or is it the opposite. This is where it gets a little murky for me. The whole idea of having a stable token that is still publicly traded and thus open to speculation.

$0.32

5 votes

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

The intent of SBD is not that it be 'open to speculation' other than speculation within a narrow range and relatively short time period due to liquidity considerations (with enough volume, a speculator can make a large amount of money betting that SBD at $0.99 will rise to $1.01 or vice versa). Instead of a speculatively determined price, increased demand for SBD should result in more SBD being circulated and decreased demand for SBD should result in less SBD being circulated, in both cases pushing the price back toward $1.

The current mechanism doesn't fully implement this but that is the intent, and the proposed change gets a bit closer while removing an odd quirk how the thresholds are currently set: between 5% and 10% there is literally nothing being done by the system to control or even influence either the supply or value of SBD (none of it being created nor destroyed, backing ratio not affected, etc.). No one really intended to create a market cap ratio 'window' for fully-free-floating SBD with no controls at all; it seems to have been an accident.

EDIT: @timcliff in his reply also noted some other perverse effects of the mechanism of shifting payouts from SBD to STEEM, which are good points too. By reducing size of the range where this occurs those effects are reduced, which is good. (I, and numerous other stakeholders and witnesses, would like to see more done, but this is a great start and kudos to @timcliff for getting it implemented and scheduled for the hard fork.)

$0.60

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @smooth. Thanks for this. I'm learning a lot from you all today. :)

Okay. So, a void or limbo area was created unintentionally between 5-10% so that whatever is suppose to happen (create or destroy SBD) happens. Sounds like a great idea to me. So, basically this was unknown until the current situation revealed it, then, if I'm understanding correctly.

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

Yes, that is one of the reasons I have supported this change. In his reply @timcliff noted some others. Generally speaking we want SBD to work better and add value ('value' here referring both to utility for users and capital attracted to the ecosystem i.e. higher STEEM price), and we believe this change helps do that.

$0.00

buggedout (68) · 6 years ago

This looks dangerous to me and I think the comparison to raising the US debt ceiling by @glenalbrethsen is a valid one. It was certainly the first thing to come to my mind when I saw it.

To me this is a bandaid solution and all we're doing here is kicking the can down the road. We are going to have an illusion of normalcy up until 9% and then at 10% we are suddenly not just getting a printing halt, but also a haircut on SBD conversions that I think could be potentially disastrous for confidence in SBD value being held at $1. What is being put in place here is a virtual cliff for the lemmings to throw themselves off.

$0.39

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

I don't think the current 'void' between 5% and 10% serves any useful purpose and it is clearly destabilizing to remove all supply or price influences on SBD within some fairly arbitrary range.

Apart from that we could quibble about exactly how things should work, like maybe the ramp should start a bit lower than 9%. But overall I agree with @blocktrades that the real debt control and safely value comes from the 10% limit, not this one, and I also agree with @timcliff that printing STEEM instead of SBD^* is not useful because it just serves (all else being equal) to drive the STEEM price down, when the STEEM price being weak is the main reason the limit has ever been hit (multiple times now).

After all, even with the current 2-5% there is nothing to prevent STEEM from dropping another 50% in value after the 5% is hit and then we are right at the 10% anyway. 50% is hardly even a big move in crypto terms (we've already seen STEEM lose 90%+ of its value two or three times). Hitting 10% and risking the haircut is always in the equation, regardless of the printing rules. SBD holders should be aware of it and consider it rather than assume it won't happen.

One last point. The haircut doesn't kick in instantly it gradually phases in. So at 10% there is no haircut. At 11% there is roughly a 10% haircut, etc. There will be plenty of opportunity to see this play out and I'm sure even before 10% is reached, as it is approached there I'm sure there will be posts warning about SBD potentially becoming less-than-fully backed, and people who don't want that will have the opportunity to sell or convert their SBD (which may itself help resolve the situation). There's nothing sudden about the transition.

^* An alternate rule we might consider (but I'm sure very few people are interested because everyone wants their 'free money') would be to stop printing rewards altogether when the debt ratio gets too high (rather than switching from printing SBD to printing STEEM), as this could be taken as a sign that the market is not valuing STEEM enough for it to be a good idea to continue diluting it.

kingyus (59) · 6 years ago

If PoW is implemented in the future like the article suggests then all of these issues will be solved...in my belief

$0.00

pratikchordia (45) · 6 years ago

Oh that's an awesome upgrade :D

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago (edited)

Hi @glenalbrethsen. Just to clarify, in terms of the "debt ceiling," the closest thing to that with SBD is the "10% limit" on the debt ratio. Basically what that does is that no matter how much SBD is printed, it will never be allowed to exceed a debt limit of 10% of the STEEM marketcap. SBD will just become redeemable for less than $1 USD worth of STEEM, instead of taking on additioanl debt. Based on that, the safety of how much debt the Steem blockchain takes on (in the form of SBD) is not changing.

What we have seen under current market conditions is that there is still a high demand for SBD (the price is consistently above $1 USD) even though the debt ratio is above 2%. What is happening under the current rules is we are printing less SBD, even though there is still excess demand. This change addresses that by allowing more SBD to be printed.

Another negative impact under the current rules is that it is printing more STEEM (instead of SBD). This means we are seeing additional (unnecessary) downward pressure on the STEEM price, when we could just be printing more SBD instead of STEEM.

The last thing to point out is that the current system is missing out on the best opportunity to use SBD to it's full advantage. When the STEEM price is at it's lowest is really the best time to print more SBD, because if you assume the price will go back up - then the blockchain ends up getting a 'discount' on how much STEEM needs to be created. For example, if $100,000 USD worth of SBD printed today when the STEEM price is around $1.00, it would only need 1/5 the amount of STEEM if the SBD was not redeemed for STEEM until the price of STEEM goes up to $5.00.

Technically the same mechanism works in reverse. If we print a bunch of SBD when the price of STEEM is at $5, and then the price drops down to $1, we have to print 5x as much STEEM. If we allow the debt ratio to get much closer to 10% though (by allowing printing all the way up to 9%), then it reduces this effect. A significant price drop in STEEM will not result in as much STEEM being printed if the debt ratio was already close to 10%, because it would be capped once it reached the 10% limit described above.

$0.75

8 votes

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @timcliff. Thank you for answering my question on this. It's been extremely helpful.

Now, what I'm wondering is, are we in some kind of market period where STEEM hasn't been before? I guess I'm wondering if it's known that 9% is the better debt ratio than 5%, why wasn't it lifted before this? And what happens if 9% doesn't prove to be enough for whatever reason?

My guess is, either this kind of market conditions have been here before, but it didn't last long enough to get a change made but it's been sitting on the back burner, or it is new, and based on whatever criteria, it was determined the raise should take place just in case the current situation was prolonged, or came back again at a later date.

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

You are correct. The situation of SBD being overvalued while the printing limits are being hit has not really happened before. It did happen very briefly in 2017 but quickly went away on its own.

However, the overall goal is not so much to react to one particular market situation as to structurally improve SBD so that it works better and adds value to the Steem platform. The changes were actually implemented and merged into the code before the current market situation occurred (though it had been recognized and anticipated).

These are improvements which have been considered and discussed for a long time and are only now getting rolled out because: a) this is the first hard fork update since early 2017, and b) it took a while to both reach consensus among witnesses, stakeholders, and developers about what to implement and then get them implemented.

$0.42

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Okay. Very good. I'm not sure how anyone else feels about consensus making, but I'm alright with it taking a while. If the required majority gets there through taking the time to deliberate and observe, better decisions get made.

It's interesting to note that this will be the first Hard Fork I'm a part of, along with everyone that has come in since the last fork, which is the vast majority of the accounts, and probably most of the daily user base still here. After 19 happening in less than a year if my math is sound, that seems to make this one that much much anticipated, especially when you add on what is expected to arrive later with Hivemind/Communities and SMTs.

Thanks for all this. I feel like I understand why this is going to happen and the reasoning behind it. I hope it, and the rest of HF 20 goes as intended, or at the very least (since there always seems to be something), keeps pushing us in the right direction. :)

$0.29

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

Well the main risk is that we see the opposite of what has been happening with SBD, and there is insufficient demand for it. We have seen that before in the earlier days of Steem. Under that scenario, then market conditions would push for SBD to be converted into STEEM, which would reduce the SBD supply.

It sounds very drastic, but the absolute worst case scenario is that the SBD peg would break in the negative direction, and SBD would be worth less than $1. At that point, it would be up to the market to determine what SBD would be worth.

$0.30

khanza.aulia (69) · 6 years ago

very good presentation, we hope that content creators related to the price at the crypto market, hopefully the price can go back to strength. this greatly influences our enthusiasm in creating valuable and worthy content

$0.20

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Okay. I think I'm getting this. This is basically a change to help ensure the SBD ratio is maintained within favorable parameters and that it continues to bolster the peg, as it is worse for SBD to break the peg in a negative direction than it is to do so in a positive.

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

Well, the peg is already 'broken' in the positive direction. There are not really sufficient mechanisms to push the price back down to the peg when it goes up. The changes being discussed here are all intended to help push the peg back down.

$0.30

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Okay. Very good. I feel better now. :) I appreciate the time taken by you and others to explain things. May it all go the direction we all hope it will go—for the betterment of the STEEM platform.

khanza.aulia (69) · 6 years ago

Apologies sir, i have wrong button press downvote 🙏🙏🤦🏿‍♂️

$0.00

lelong (46) · 6 years ago

@glenalbrethsen so sbd won't be higher than 1$ or less than 1$. is this they trying to fix..

$0.00

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @lelong.

The short answer to that question is probably yes, in theory.

Longer answer is, it's not like they can fix it to any one price point, though. They're doing what they can, but the market is still going to decide what SBD does, even with this code change. Sounds like they're mostly concerned at this point with SBD dropping below a $1, too.

$0.00

cryptkeeper17 (64) · 6 years ago (edited)

Excellent points I think I follow you here @timcliff. Right now there is an underflow of SBD within the economy and perhaps not coincidentally there is a very very low rate of interaction on here right now with the users across the board. Honestly there really is no way to deny that even with the intentional decrease in supply it has brought steem value's down significantly by price and additional quantities paid out in steem per post--which is the exact opposite intention it was created. Getting to the SBD payouts in posts, if I do not buy anything that really requires me to use SBD (for example bid bots which have basically become the engines that fuel SBD consumption in the economy really at all and are a virtual surefire losing bet right now) why would my post payout be tied and beholden to SBDs? I get the relief they bring in having to produce additional steem in the event of price crunches but isn't this one radical turn from one direction to offset the other? With the ability to overflow the system with up to 4.5 to 5 times more in supply as of say right now isn't that a concern? At $5 steem that isn't much of an issue but what if whales that are unloading truck loads of steem right now keep doing this at prices even below $1 when this fork comes out? SBDs will become an extinct medium of exchange very fast on here for sheer worthlessness.
A very overachieving, proactive approach at this fork would have been having smart tokens ready to launch and take our chances with them working out desired effects that we hope they do in helping reflect the many varied interests of our economy here on steemit. It would seem to solve a lot of this angst that is going on within the community, but it is not even mentioned on this announcement. I hope to avoid sounding like Captain Hindsight, but here we are and we have what we have moving forward. Are we supposed to believe that continuing to bail out the bid bots massive losses since sbds/steem has plummeted and votes are more and more worthless that continuing to fund this losing endeavor with more of the same is a legitimate response to curing these ills? If I were manipulating prices of steem/sbd I would be terrified of a smart token, because now I have to track 10,000 tokens day one when they are able to be implemented and find which are good and which are worthless. Also in the meantime finding out what they are being used for and whether it's worthwhile to follow or not. That is a lot and I would love to hear your response here, I certainly am not venting this all in your direction but to the debate at large and what can be done, and preferably not pushed down the road by a CEO that is currently unloading their stake in the company at two year lows in prices at best.

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

As far as the smart tokens you are referring to, they sound a lot like what they are planning for SMTs. What are your thoughts on those?

cryptkeeper17 (64) · 6 years ago (edited)

They are incredibly promising. Having the dynamic of getting payouts with them within communities/groups you choose to affiliate and have closer control on how the tokens are issued and how value is created is incredibly intriguing. Having them issued at a customized mode, whether it be in curation rewards or simply upvoting a vested member in a group could go a long way in maintaining and building membership here. It's all future projection of course, it really depends on how they are understood but it does really reward the people that do a lot individual community based activities.

$0.04

fedeecaccia (25) · 6 years ago

What happens if we reach the 10% doubt ot ownership ratio and the STEEM price drops, let's say, a 50%? In this case the ratio will increase to 20%. Which are the mechanisms to regulate it again?

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

There is info here: https://steemit.com/sbd/@timcliff/sbd-explained

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago

Interesting comparison Glen!

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @ecoinstant.

I'm going to guess you're talking about the comparison between the lifting of the debt ceiling the U.S. Congress loves to do periodically and the lifting of the 5% SBD debt ratio to 9%?

If so, I thought it was too, but the major difference is, the ceiling is 10%, and will remain that way, according to everyone who answered the question. Which is good. We don't need to be jacking that up.

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago

Well, they might have said that at 5% lol.

All they need to do, like congress, is vote again. I do think there are some technical differences, we don't need the debt to pay anything, all we are doing is balancing the markets between debt instrument and token. No body can foreclose on us if we don't pay our debts, for example.

But I still think the analogy is apt.

By the way, I noticed you changed your vote on my comment. Not a big deal, I mis-vote all the time with those goofy sliders, especially on mobile. But did you know that you don't get the voting power back? You actually spend vp for both votes, and just burn the first vote. Just something I learned, and I post it here with all these tech guys hoping that if I am wrong they will call me out!

Love and Light Glen, I always love seeing you around, I like that you try to get to the bottom of things, not a yes-man, but a ask another question man!

$0.00

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Yeah, I've been noticing that myself with the upvote. I should have just left it. I mostly have an issue when the system is glitching and it tells me I have to re-sign in to vote. Then it jacks the slider up to 100% and votes that way without allowing access to it until after the vote is made.

re: said that at 5%.

I was kind of feeling confused myself, about that, but apparently there's just things they find out about as things unfold. It seems a little disconcerting to me, but it's hard to tell sometimes what I should be worrying about and what I can just let ride.

re: vote again

I also thought of that. Is there a market where that might be favorable, or at least considered? I guess we'll find out down line. Whether it has any repercussions or not, why set any parameters at all if it's no big deal to just raise it?

re: not a yes man

Well, I appreciate that. I'm getting too old and grumpy to take things at face value, though I do prefer a civil conversation over a finger pointing contest. It just seems to get more accomplished, and when I have more questions later, they tend to get answered.

I get concerned that in our desire to be transparent and decentralized that we're needing to worry about a great many more things than what we really want to. On the other hand, if this is to be some form of governance for the blockchain, than we all need to be aware of what's happening, and at least attempt to understand it.

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago

Hey that has happened to me! I know exactly what you mean. I have been switching to steemitstage.com when it gets really bad, two nights ago it was pretty terrible. I think this must be server load on the front-end.

I do think parameters are important, because most of what happens is automated. But, I think I read timcliff say that it is better to issue SBD type debt when steem is cheap, because we only need to pay back each one with a dollars worth of steem. So if it goes up we can pay it back with less.

I'm not really worried about it, I think 10 percent is still pretty low for such a useful token. But I really like that you are there poking them about it! Debt is a tool, if used right you can avoid hurting yourself.

I agree what you say, we have a much greater responsibility in a decentralized system!

Cheers Glen :)

$0.00

tradermeetscoder (49) · 6 years ago

we live - we learn
thanks

$0.00

cryptkeeper17 (64) · 6 years ago (edited)

Oh the debt ceiling in the US, don't worry about that, it's just a number of absolutely zero consequence. LOL if only on steemit we could get away with what is gotten away with there...

$0.00

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @cryptkeeper17.

I'd like to be able to get away with it in my own pocket book.

No money? No problem. I vote to raise my own personal line of credit. Of course, I'm good for it. I'm me!

cryptkeeper17 (64) · 6 years ago

If only, but don't forget to also vote yourself a raise first.

$0.00

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Man. It's amazing the United States is still standing and at the very least, a facsimile of a sovereign nation. I guess the fact that the exact same thing could be said about virtually every other nation is what's saving our collective skins. We just keep passing the buck around like a hot potato.

There's so many things that Congress gets away with that we can't. Set your own raise. Blank checks. Insider trading. Unless you tell your family members, then it's a no go.

$0.00

geneeverett (61) · 6 years ago

USA has less debt per % if gdp then China Europe or Japan so it’s not a USA problem but the whole globe

andrarchy (72) · 6 years ago

Those changes were submitted by @timcliff and approved by the witnesses. He will have to speak to the intent behind these changes. I can only speak for myself when I say that it's great to see a community-member PR acquiring consensus among the witnesses and being scheduled to be added to the protocol.

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Cool, @andrarchy. Tim's been good at follow up so I'll see what he says. And I agree, it is good to get some consensus on any level, especially from the community and the witnesses. The more proactive we can be, the better.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago

11 AM EST time on a Tuesday is the optimum time to do this?

You can never satisfy everyone on a global system. One of the requirements of a witness or even developer role on such a system is the necessity for a certain amount of 24 hour availability. 11 am on Tuesday is okay for US and Europe but pretty bad (early to extreme early morning) for most of Asia. Making it later helps with Asia but hurts Europe. There is no perfect time.

$0.00

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Okay. Pretty much figured that to be the case. I was looking at it, of course, from the user standpoint, but that's obviously not the only consideration here. You've given us all a decent amount of heads up, though.

Since I've never been through one of these before, is there any expected amount of downtime at all? Or, if everything goes according to plan, do we just all keep working as it rolls out?

In a normal update there's usually the time it takes for that to happen. With a hard fork on a blockchain, though, it sounds like things keep rolling as you go?

smooth (70) · 6 years ago

If everything goes according to plan there should not be any downtime.

themanwithnoname (64) · 6 years ago

Looks like there are some good changes that will be implemented. I'm especially looking forward to having the curation window shortened as things move quickly. Honestly, with the amount of short-form content on Steemit, a 5-10 minute window would probably more appropriate, but maybe it will take more time to convince the powers that be. It's at least a step in the right direction to giving more curation rewards to the curators.

$1.07

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

Agree with you on the time window. The original suggestion from @blocktrades was to reduce it to five minutes, which I personally would prefer (if not shorter). However, this is a step in the right direction which addresses some concerns about making too extreme of a change and causing new problems.

I also think the original goal of addressing bots and autovoting is less needed now because there is so much more content. Originally it was quite possible for bots to instantly vote for all of the (five?) very popular posters and grab all the rewards (with superlinear rewards concentrating things even further). Now that is no longer the case, rewards are much more spread out and with limited vote power, deciding what to vote for is relatively more important then getting in instant votes.

I hope once we evaluate the effects of changing it from 30 minutes to 15 minutes we can consider further reduction.

Thanks for the feedback.

lafona (60) · 6 years ago (edited)

I am happy to see the reduction in the time window, however I would hope we could move towards the removal of it eventually. It does seem like it is a solution to a problem we no longer have(too many curators/bots, not enough content) and probably just over complicates the user experience now. I think it is important to not underestimate the negative effects of a mechanism which complicates the user experience and potentially adds a barrier for profitable curation. Personally I wonder if we could return to the no reverse auction , 50/50 split for rewards. It is much easier to explain and comprehend and I think it would help to reincentivize good curation over for profit self voting.

$0.67

smooth (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

I see some value in a very short window. With no window you can have a rush of bots all flooding to get in the very first block of certain known-to-be-popular content, which could be viewed as a sort of unintended denial of service attack. A ramp that forces bots to pick what each believes to be the optimal time over a short window rather than all trying to be first at the exact same moment may be better for purely practical reasons of spreading out blockchain load.

But IMO this should all happen over bot timescales (something like 15 to 60 seconds at most) rather than human timescales, and ideally can be ignored by human curators rather than introducing the whole 'optimal time to vote' complication as is the case now.

Removing it entirely as you suggest may also be okay though.

$0.25

themanwithnoname (64) · 6 years ago

I was thinking about suggesting the removal of the voting time as well, but like you said, if you remove that, the bots will have a huge advantage over the human curators. I've had GINAbot tell me that someone voted on my new post before it even told me that I had created one. The goal should be to leave a small period of time to let the humans get some curation, then open it up for regular votes and whatever else.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. You've been around for a while and seen a lot of the changes, so you have a unique perspective on how to make it work well.

themanwithnoname (64) · 6 years ago

I wasn't around for the superlinear rewards, but it sounds like it was a whole different ballgame.

with limited vote power deciding what to vote for is relatively more important then getting in instant votes.

Also there are a lot fewer votes that we get per day this is even more important than "back in the day."

There probably won't be a system that is entirely fair. And there probably won't be a way to keep those who want to abuse the system from doing so, but we can try to make it a good overall experience for most people and we'll be doing fine. We're still making more money posting here than they are over on facebook. :)

exyle (79) · 6 years ago

This news made my day! Thanks for all the hard work you guys are doing for us!

$0.97

5 votes

drakos (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

I like the new witness_set_properties operation where we can use the witness signing key. However, on a multi-server setup, each server has a different key pair, so it may not be practical. For example:

server 1 fails, use its signing key to enable server 2 to take over
after fixing server 1, will have to use server 2's signing key to re-enable server 1.

Annoying, but can be circumvented with a script that fetches the public key on the blockchain and use the corresponding private key.

It would be preferable to have a new key role dedicated for witness operations, this would solve all the problems.

$0.91

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

I’ve read somewhere a while back that new key authorities are expensive (as far as development time and complexity) to implement. If it can be solved by witnesses spending a few hours coding their scripts to handle it, that is probably the most practical way to go.

$0.44

therealwolf (75) · 6 years ago

Have to agree with @drakos.

If I understood correctly, the action has to be confirmed with the private active signing key, which varies depending on the active signing-key.

That would require an additional fetch of the active public signing-key. Maybe it would be better to add the signing key as optional or create a separate key for updating witness-data.

$0.00

lukestokes (75) · 6 years ago

A separate key for updating witness-data would be nice. With this set up, we would need every server to have access to every signing key, which is not ideal. One of the points of separate signing keys is to ensure if one server ever got compromised, witnesses could quickly switch to a different signing key and never use the old one again.

Either way, getting access to a signing key and being able to tweak witness parameters is less dangerous to the individual witness than having access to their active key, so overall applaud the change.

$0.40

therealwolf (75) · 6 years ago

Exactly @lukestokes. And actually, it would be quite useful to have different keys/authorities for different dApps. So instead of creating a special witness key, it would be the smarter way to create a general way of adding 3rd party authorities.

$0.00

fredrikaa (70) · 6 years ago

Looks at the summary
Looks at the current cryptomarket
Brb buying the dip.

$0.61

itstime (60) · 6 years ago

I guess you could say BTFD

P.S @coinbros are on steemit !!

$0.37

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

That's more news of nothing to really change that matters to the value of STEEM.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago

If you think that these changes don't matter to STEEM, I would suggest that you don't know all that much about STEEM.

$0.00

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

Yea...I don't.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

Yea...this is definitely gibberish to me.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago

Well, easier and faster to make new accounts. That is a huge complaint and bottle neck right now. This is the most important and massive change that will affect all of us inviting our friends. The RC changes change a lot actually, but onboarding new users is huge.

Lowering the time between comments.

Tinkering with curation rewards, SBD limits, delegation cooldowns, okay I get that maybe none of the rest is life changing for your account.

But its big news, let me tell you ;-p

$0.00

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

I don't understand the need to make multiple accounts. I've been squirming around here for a year.
Don't see the purpose of making multiple accounts.
I see where you're coming from.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago (edited)

Maybe your friend or brother or lover or uncle or neighbor want an account too? A new account has to be created for them unless you are going to let them use yours. In the current system, someone has to pay! This takes time, people complain.

Now, its faster, less costly, and more people can make accounts! This drives up the demand for steem, causing even more people to want to make accounts!

fitinfun (71) · 6 years ago

I am also not up on this and don't really understand this post. When I came here in June 2017, I did not pay for my account. Nor did anyone else I invited in the last year. Has something changed now that makes people pay to get in? All of the content creators I invited have left and I have stopped trying to get people here now, but you never know.

$0.00

Show 3 more replies

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

How much more gibberish will the creators of this concoction create to make it more useful to the everyday person?

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago

Hey Tony! Feel free to come back when you find it useful! I already find the free hosting, built in monetization and uncensorable permanancy of the blockchain with 3 second transactions and zero fees to be very useful!

$0.00

andrarchy (72) · 6 years ago

lol

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

Dip below $.90 before HF 20 and it's going to be a great 4th quarter.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

chorock (76) · 6 years ago

15-minute Curation Window is really good. A person can read the article in 5 minutes and he/she can upvote it in 15 minutes.

$0.52

bryan-imhoff (66) · 6 years ago

Not to get ahead of ourselves... but any hints on if changes to Condenser (Steemit.com) may be in line to follow the hardfork fairly quickly? In particular, I just think a visualization of the RC system and usage will be critical to limiting user confusion and making the change a very positive one. Most new users will be largely unaware of any outside reporting tools that may develop and could grow frustrated as their actions slow or cease altogether.

$0.45

lukestokes (75) · 6 years ago

Good point. Many other Steem related sites show bandwidth indicators today. Maybe showing various "mana" indicators for these new limitations would be helpful on Steemit.com as well.

$0.00

ew-and-patterns (70) · 6 years ago

This looks like a pissed off, grumbling face above the Hardfork logo...

Please don't do negative foreshadowing. Or is this some kind of a joke of your graphic designer?

$0.40

crimsonclad (66) · 6 years ago

Huge changes here, and big kudos to how clearly and methodically this post is laid out~ for those wondering what the hell a Velocity is, this is the perfect comprehensive guide. The extra security and nit-picky control over witness parameters and smaller vote accuracy are both things that I personally really hoped would be addressed.

Onwards!

$0.40

ogoowinner (70) · 6 years ago

Owuya! Ozo abiakwa la. Ngwa Daaalu nu o! From nwa afo Igbo ogoowinner.

$0.27

bestkizito (58) · 6 years ago

Hahahahahaha!

camzy (67) · 6 years ago

ana me kele o....! :-)

jessicool (11) · 6 years ago

Lol, igbo representing...ya gazie

holybranches (60) · 6 years ago

haha i love this.

masterwriter (58) · 6 years ago

Nne ima ife anaru!

$0.00

lukestokes (75) · 6 years ago

Excellent, detailed update. Thank you! Again, I'm happy to see both technical and non-technical content on this account.

Question relating to account_subsidy_pool_cap and account_subsidy_daily_rate. Will Steemit, inc be providing some suggested values for these prior to launch? Steemit is the main faucet, but there are others as well and it would be great to get some training on how these changes will impact the ecosystem. We want to avoid account creation spam and name squatting, but we also need to ensure the entire point of these changes (making it easier for companies to bring millions of users to Steem) are available to us.

I'd love to see the witnesses along with app developers working together to test much of this on a testnet prior to launch. I'm looking forward to more information about that. Thanks!

$0.19

clayboyn (70) · 6 years ago

I am absolutely loving the idea of resource credits and the new account creation model. This is going to be amazing. Simultaneously make it easier to bring on new users while getting rid of the incentive to create spam accounts. I'm a little weary on doubling our debt cap with SBD, but I suppose it is what it is and if the price of STEEM falls it will self correct like it did last time. Thanks for the update.

$0.17

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

Just to clarify, the 10% cap on the debt limit will still remain in place, and will not be changed by what is being done.

clayboyn (70) · 6 years ago

That's good to hear.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 6 years ago

Nicely done and I especially like the healthy amount of advance notice in the release schedule.

$0.15

valth (68) · 6 years ago

We finally got a date for HF20! That's amazing :D

$0.13

itstime (60) · 6 years ago

hear hear...timelines are super welcome !!

$0.00

grey580 (61) · 6 years ago

All steemit users will be forking it so hard on the 25th.

$0.11

shortsegments (77) · 6 years ago

Hi
The ability to edit old posts doesn’t appear to have been implemented yet?
Or am I looking in the wrong place on my posts?
This what I am seeing:

$0.11

voteme (5) · 6 years ago

You got a 33.33% upvote from @voteme courtesy of @shortsegments! For next round, send minimum 0.01 SBD to bid for upvote.

Do you know, you can also earn daily passive income simply by delegating your Steem Power to voteme by clicking following links: 10SP, 25SP, 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.

$0.00

mysearchisover (70) · 6 years ago

Seems pretty complicated.

$0.10

shortsegments (77) · 6 years ago

Yeah.. I will have to read this a few time to digest it.

programmingvalue (54) · 6 years ago

Really excited for more updates to Steem :)

$0.10

davemccoy (63) · 6 years ago

I have a question about the vote values. According to the statement in there about dustvotes:

Dust Vote Threshold Changes

The Velocity Hardfork will change how the Dust Vote Threshold works by allowing users with any amount of SP to cast votes as long as they have sufficient RCs. Votes that are below the threshold will be posted to the blockchain but they will have no impact on rewards. This will allow users to have a better user experience on all Steem-based applications by enabling them to vote any time they choose (regardless of the size of their vote), provided that they have enough RCs.

This change will make very weak votes become worth nothing. In order to treat all votes (big and small) equally, all votes above the threshold will have the equivalent amount of rewards removed from their vote. This effectively establishes a baseline voting strength that applies to everyone. In addition to making it more fair, there is also the benefit of introducing a slight non-linear rewards curve at the lower end of the spectrum (to discourage spam), while still maintaining a linear rewards curve for votes above the baseline.

Does anyone know what a very weak vote is? Is the current dust threshold still $0.02?

This is an important development either way!

$0.09

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

There are two “dust” thresholds, which can get a little confusing.

There is a dust payout threshold, which requires at least 0.02 worth of payout on a post/comment in order to receive a reward. (If the payout is less, it gets rounded down to zero.) This will be unaffected by the changes being proposed.

There is also a dust vote threshold, which is a minimum restriction on the size of votes that are allowed. This is what is changing, as described in the post.

davemccoy (63) · 6 years ago

Thank you very much @timcliff for taking the time to explain it to me... I have now explained that to others too... Very helpful!

dftba (49) · 6 years ago

So, if I have 1000 SP and 100% voting power, that value from my vote is not what is changing, correct?

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

Correct

$0.00

khanza.aulia (69) · 6 years ago

I want to ask a little about the distribution of rewards for now, where the creator does not get SBD, but 50:50 between Steem and SP. Is this related to what was explained in the above post regarding hardfork velocity updates? thanks sir

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

Yes. That is exactly what it is from :)

$0.00

bashadow (65) · 6 years ago

Good question I was wondering that myself.

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

See response to the parent comment.

$0.00

bashadow (65) · 6 years ago

Thanks.

$0.00

hanshotfirst (76) · 6 years ago

I am thrilled to see a concrete date tied to this! I realize that the date may shift due to unforeseen circumstances, but in my two years here, the Hardforks have all taken place within a reasonable time frame from the planned date. When the date did need to change, it was in order to implement an even better idea.

Thank you for all of your hard work!

$0.08

elsiekjay (76) · 6 years ago

PROGRESS!!!
September is bound to be a great Month! I can totally Feel it!!Best News I've got today, glad to see the entire community excited about this. Great Changes too!
Thank you Steemit Blockchain Team!

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

So are you buying now or waiting until the 25th of August?
No mention of SMTs...again

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago (edited)

SMTs are the next hardfork planned after Velocity, so Velocity getting completed means we are getting closer to SMTs.

$0.00

mejustandrew (58) · 6 years ago

Hey guys, I have to congratulate you, you have done an amazing job and thanks a lot for remembering me! You are the best!

andrarchy (72) · 6 years ago (edited)

Thank you for helping to make this the best blockchain protocol in the world! ;)

https://steemit.com/writing/@showtime24/i-made-some-changes-to-the-steem-whitepaper

showtime24 (49) · 6 years ago

⚠️ PLEASE READ⚠️
I fixed grammatical errors in the STEEM whitepaper and no one has noticed. SOMEONE please look at this and get it exposure. We need to make the STEEM whitepaper look more professional..

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

The whitepaper is in an open source repository. Any community member is able to submit a pull request to propose changes.

$0.00

liberosist (70) · 6 years ago

It seems like an eternity since Velocity was initially announced in June 2017. I'm glad to see it all come to fruition. Thanks for all the hard work, developers. See you on September 25th.

adetorrent (74) · 6 years ago

Wow, some epic changes here. I think the self upvote /curation changes are what most people here will notice.

Followed by the 20 seconds comments restriction change. That's huge for someone like me who types quite fast haha.

My favourite one is the delegation cool-off time reduction to 5 days. I long for the day it gets even shorter than that.

Thanks.

zoneboy (69) · 6 years ago

September 25 is the date. Fasten your seat belt as we moon 🌒

itstime (60) · 6 years ago

Where we are going we don't need belts...

$0.00

mup (55) · 6 years ago

Yes, cuz you're floating in space. We're getting closer to the Moon. <3

$0.00

flauwy (73) · 6 years ago

Wa have waited long and sem-patiently for this hardfork and I am incredibly excited to see it come finally to fruition. This will be a super important change for a larger anboarding. The #promo-steem community will celebrate that a lot for sure. That puts us also one step closer to SMTs...

moonbot (54) · 6 years ago

Finally, good news!

taskmaster4450 (78) · 6 years ago

Will this handle the slow sign up process?

bryan-imhoff (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Looks to me like it’ll allow dApps to do a lot of signups on their own as they can potentially use their stakes to immediately fund new accounts with the discount tokens. Likewise there could be some easy tools to allow users to send friends invites that include instant account creation off their own RCs. Signup vetting can also be more limited as new accounts aren’t starting with any SP. My only concern would be around mass signups for “name squatting” if the process gets too lax.

$0.11

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

I guess that's what I got out of the summary on signups, too. The question, as you say, will it prevent the mass signups? I'd heard that it would. It didn't seem to be mentioned here that I saw the first time through, but there was plenty to read. :)

bryan-imhoff (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Well, it disincentivises the fraudulent signups wherein someone will gather 100 or 1000 bot accounts and have 1,500 to 15,000 SP delegated to their use on Steemit’s dime! Now, you can make 1,000 accounts and all you’ll have is 1,000 names and 0 SP. Hopefully the RC system is stringent enough these 0 value accounts wouldn’t be able to spam more than a handful of times a day as well.
So the only real attack vector is for the value of the account names alone.

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

I see. So, essentially people can set up these accounts and then auction/sell them off like domain names and not have to worry about there being any STEEM in the accounts whatsoever? Is that what your'e saying?

bryan-imhoff (66) · 6 years ago

Essentially. After this fork, new accounts will start with 0 SP. So the main exploit loophole of creating accounts for free SP is closed. The only worry is name “squatting” just like is done with domains, but I imagine that could never be truly stopped, so we’ll start seeing plenty of variations and appended numbers!

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

It is not a silver bullet, although it helps make it more salable for the long-term. Users who are signing up for free accounts via signup.steemit.com will still have to go through the same approval process, which is independent of what is happening in the hardfork. @bryan-imhoff is correct though that with the new discounted accounts being available now, it does open up more opportunity for other services to offer signup methods as well.

$0.00

prakashghai (63) · 6 years ago

20 second comment limit reduced to 3 second is the only thing worthwhile for a lay user like me.

Hf20 aint exciting enough.

bryan-imhoff (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

C’mon! This is possibly the most important update! I truly believe Steemit has been holding back on other major improvements until this problem was solved, because it would be useless to build an amazing site & system that no one could use.

Think about it this way. There are roughly 250 million Steem in existence. Up until this time, new accounts have needed roughly 15 SP in order to have bandwidth access that would enable a reasonable user experience. Let’s say we could even knock that down to 10SP. That means we had a cap of 25 million users, and that’s only if everyone divested their stake so we would all have just 10SP! More accurately, with Steemit Inc. shouldering all the account creation delegations from their available stake, we would currently buckle under the weight of 5-10 million user signups... which is a lot for Steem, but a drop in the bucket for major sites and networks.

This move to the resource credit system is hopefully unlocking us to mass adoption at last. HF20 may be unglamorous, not a lot to see... but it’s very exciting “under the hood.”

$0.94

10 votes

prakashghai (63) · 6 years ago

Steemit should have done something to counter ONOSocial's lifetime rewards system for a post.

At least it should have extended the 7 day post reward to a month if not more.

$0.00

cardboard (61) · 6 years ago

Does a user like you care that now all your friends will be able to create account without waiting at least 2 weeks?

$0.00

prakashghai (63) · 6 years ago

all that I know is that one can create a twitter / instagram or FB account instantly.

$0.00

prameshtyagi (71) · 6 years ago

It is good that hf20 finally happening but except bit speed up signing and allowing 3 sec comments - nothing much exciting in hf20.

Bring communities and SMTs to make a real difference

freedomno1 (55) · 6 years ago

Thanks for the schematic update I don't typically see the steemit hardfork notes however it is good to stumble upon this.

$0.04

kalemandra (74) · 6 years ago

Steemit is great, but it will bemuch better after Velocity Hardfork.
What about voting bots? Will there be a change (restriction) or not? I couldn't find any info about them in this article.

losi (59) · 6 years ago

WOW richtig nice Änderungen, das freut mich voll und ich hoffe auf mehr nice Steemians.

pastrane (50) · 6 years ago

“Steve Jobs gave a small private presentation about the iTunes Music Store to some independent record label people. My favorite line of the day was when people kept raising their hand saying, "Does it do [x]?", "Do you plan to add [y]?". Finally Jobs said, "Wait wait — put your hands down. Listen: I know you have a thousand ideas for all the cool features iTunes could have. So do we. But we don't want a thousand features. That would be ugly. Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It's about saying NO to all but the most crucial features.”
― Derek Sivers

thompson2 (54) · 6 years ago

nice initiatives

thanks for sharing this

$0.00

crypto.talk (58) · 6 years ago

Thank you for the exciting update!

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

lasseehlers (69) · 6 years ago

Thanks for the info on HF20.

$0.00

cardboard (61) · 6 years ago

In order to eliminate this advantage, the portion of curation rewards that is not given to the curators due to the early voting penalty will be returned to the rewards pool instead of being awarded to the author.

So does this penalty (return to reward pool) apply to all voters who vote before 30 min mark or only the author?

In fact, when I think about it, it applies to all voters yes?

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

All voters

$0.00

cardboard (61) · 6 years ago

Thanks Tim.

$0.00

pradumngaur (42) · 6 years ago

Hey please update me what is Hard Fork

$0.00

itstime (60) · 6 years ago (edited)

@ned comes to your house and feeds you something delicious on a fork... he won't stop no matter how HARD you try...hence the HARD FORK

also..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(blockchain)

andrarchy (72) · 6 years ago

It's basically a system upgrade. It's like when Apple or Android upgrades the operating system on your phone, except this is for the software that every Steem-powered application is built on

https://developers.steem.io/glossary/#glossary-governance

inertia (73) · 6 years ago

$0.00

flysky (73) · 5 years ago

I went back in time and cane across your announcementat hard fork triumph.
Just wanted to follow up if you can update us on feedback how it resulted in practical application and steemit community.

$0.00

reseller (74) · 6 years ago

Congrats, you made the #steemitminute for today!
Click the Image Below to see the Video!

$0.00

ontheverge (54) · 6 years ago

Change in comments creation is useful

$0.00

akdx (66) · 6 years ago

I am glad to know that HF20 is coming. It was a much awaited thing as we were reading about it time and again. I think some issues, related to Steem platform, were addressed effectively and some others were totally ignored.
Positive changes: implementation of Resource Credit in place of bandwidth system, procedure of account creation, change in dust vote threshold, removal of the minimum sp power down restriction, change in 30 minutes curation timeline, change in self voting reward to some extent, time limit of 28 days for internal market orders, removal of 20 second comment limit, decrease in delegation cool down period, fix for double voting exploitation, increase in account voting power precision, upvote lockout period and other witness related issues.
However, there are many issues which were left untouched. An issue like self voting was addressed but it was done not very effectively. No limit was imposed on self voting. Also issues like vote selling, circle jerking, downvoting without assigning any reason, no payout for quality posts were left untouched. These were the core issues which many users wanted to be addressed and fixed. I welcome change but this change cannot be said a radical change. It is an old wine in new bottle. So, it is a bit disappointing.

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

What solutions are being proposed? There is a lot of talk about the problems, but are there any workable proposals that consensus can be built around?

$0.00

akdx (66) · 6 years ago

Something must be done to revive this platform. It has become a cow which forehead is the responsibility of the content creators and the right over it's milking have been given to the whales. So, whales and not owners are getting milk and minnows are getting urine and cow dung.

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

That is not a solution oriented comment. I think we are done talking.

$0.00

akdx (66) · 6 years ago

Dear Tim. It was not possible for me to sum up everything in a single comment thread. I have wrote a post on these issues. I hope you would like to check it. I have many suggestions but I not many people bother to read posts on this platform. They simply upvote or ignore a post without opening it. This is the problem with this platform.
I appreciate your work for this platform. I am confident that you can change many thing here.

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

Send me a link to your suggestions and I’ll review.

$0.00

akdx (66) · 6 years ago

With pleasure sir.
This is the link of my post...https://steemit.com/steem/@akdx/hard-fork-20-is-this-the-time-to-improve-reward-distribution-system.
I wanted to add many things but due to time constraint I could not do much. I hope at least some suggestions may be considered by the developers.
Thank you.

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

I just took a quick look. I’ll review in more detail and reply on Monday.

$0.00

Show 1 more reply

steemitromney (53) · 6 years ago

Now that account creation is being regulated, there should be more options. An interesting proposal i read long ago was a decreasing vote weight for consecutive voting on the same account. Assuming people do not have enough shill accounts anymore to effectively distribute all their voting power, this would encourage people to diversify their upvotes. Large investors will not be happy of course but it might bring back some of the original 'let the community decide on whats trending' idea.

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

The abusers would just create shill accounts, and the 'honest' users would be the only ones that would get punished.

$0.00

steemitromney (53) · 6 years ago

How about changing Trending, New and Hot to monthly, weekly, dayly and hourly trending? It will open a lot of slots for shorter visibility and give curators more choice.

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

There has been a lot of discussion about that. I think the plan is to change everything out once we have communities.

$0.00

steemitromney (53) · 6 years ago

Your effort inspires

$0.00

holm (67) · 6 years ago (edited)

" witnesses have come to a consensus that the 30-minute rule is taking curation rewards away from human voters who are actively consuming content and voting on material they like. For this reason, the Velocity Hardfork will reduce the curation window from 30 minutes to 15 minutes "

This makes life so much easier for us readers. Since I like my curation rewards and trending pages are more or less useless I like to scan the" new" page. Now I only have to keep a new tap open for maximum 15mins:))

Overall some great changes, but this one is my personal favorite.

$0.00

friendly-fenix (59) · 6 years ago

Yeah this is good, I can't wait for 30 min, too much adhd or something,
I always get sidetracked...

$0.00

friendly-fenix (59) · 6 years ago

AMAZING GUYS/GIRLS!
=)

$0.00

protegeaa (61) · 6 years ago

Exciting times! Great work getting a date set and can't wait to see it rolled out!

$0.00

surfermarly (74) · 6 years ago

Wow, so many changes!! Thanks for keeping us posted.

Killing the 20-seconds-post-limit is huge! I have received so many messages from users who thought that they were doing something wrong, not being able to submit their comments faster...😉

Maybe it's a stupid question, but since when is it "Steem Blockchain Dollars" and not "Steem Backed Dollars"...? Or did I even use the wrong term during more than two years...? Yikes 😝

September 25 will be another great milestone in Steem's history, let's do this!

$0.00

blocktrades (74) · 6 years ago

You were using the right term for SBD. Seems like a marketing change...

$0.04

surfermarly (74) · 6 years ago

Ah, good to know! Thanks for stopping by and letting me know @blocktrades :-)

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

It was originally called Steem Backed Dollars. It got renamed a while back when they released the "bluepaper".

surfermarly (74) · 6 years ago

Ooooops :-) Thanks for the info, Tim!!

$0.00

caxxandra (44) · 6 years ago

do something about the price of steem
so discouraging

$0.00

therealwolf (75) · 6 years ago

I'll check out the project directory right away - great job!

$0.00

teamhumble (74) · 6 years ago

awesome work as always, great to have a date to work too and some of those changes look really incredible. thank you for your dedication, skill and focus! roll on september!

$0.00

jrswab (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

Sweet! Great work team <3 Also what a great (day after) birthday gift for me :p

its-happening

$0.00

ecoinstant (68) · 6 years ago

This may be the best gif I have every seen...

That's going in a folder

$0.00

d00k13 (75) · 6 years ago

I love the curation window & self voting changes, keep up the good work guys!

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

mayvil (64) · 6 years ago

Interesante los cambios, esperemos que sea de fácil entendimiento para todos los que están ingresando. Esto se hará el 20 de Agosto o 25 de Septiembre?

$0.00

ervin-lemark (71) · 6 years ago

How can we see which witnesses and how many are in favor of this upgrade?

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

It will be up to individual witnesses to express their views to the stakeholders however they see fit. Many will do this in the form of witness update posts.

$0.00

ervin-lemark (71) · 6 years ago

OK, thanks for your answer. I will rephrase the question:

Is there an official way to see the collected votes on one page?

I can answer the question myself - NO.

Then the question would be:

Why there is no official way (to collect and) to see the collected votes on one page?

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

Once the hardfork code is released, you will be able to see on the https://steemd.com/witnesses page which witnesses are voting in favor of it based on their version number. (Witnesses running 20.x are voting 'yes'.) Until the code is released and witnesses start actually voting though (by installing the new version) then it is up to them to communicate their plans to the stakeholders.

$0.00

ervin-lemark (71) · 6 years ago

Thanks again. I forgot that there is version visible on the witnesses page.

OK, you've got away with this answer :)

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

If a community member wanted to do the work of parsing all the witness reports and possibly even reaching out to the individual witnesses to ask how they are planning to vote, then created a post with a summary like you are asking for - I suspect the community would find it valuable ;)

$0.00

steemstreams (32) · 6 years ago

Great news!

$0.00

toofasteddie (70) · 6 years ago

Thanks for this important summary. It will be a good and needed change.

$0.00

jessicool (11) · 6 years ago

Wow, i think this is a welcome development for the entire steem community, but my question is will this pump the price of steem?

$0.00

sugarfix (55) · 6 years ago

Yeah absolutely, there is a big queue of Goldman Sachs execs trading their bitcoin for Steem as I write :D

$0.00

jack333 (53) · 6 years ago

It will be implemented in 25 August right?

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

What do you mean by implemented?

$0.00

jack333 (53) · 6 years ago

I mean will it be real in August 25?

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

That is still not clear. As the post says: The Hardfork is scheduled to take place on Tuesday, September 25, at 11:00am EST. That is when it will be "live".

$0.00

snrm (57) · 6 years ago

I love the changes to how curation is handled! I think it goes in line with the goals of Steemit and what most users want from the experience :).

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

tonygreene113 (59) · 6 years ago

Not very much going on...

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

inspire1 (65) · 6 years ago

Since this platform is so technical in nature, it will be hard for everyone to understand all of this, myself included. I will have to re-read this tonight and tomorrow. I grasped the larger concepts of change, but I am trying to still understand the current self-vote scenario vs. the future. I was thinking that it was advantageous to wait for 30 minutes to self-vote. Are you saying that the current system makes it advantageous to self vote before 30 minutes and now it will still be advantageous to self vote, but before 15 minutes? I've been doing the polar opposite and waiting 30 minutes or more if I self-vote my post currently.

$0.00

el-cr (64) · 6 years ago

thanks for the info, is there anything users have to do to keep their tokens / coins safe prior hardfork? or just keep them in our wallets?

$0.00

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago

No action should be required by the users.

$0.00

cryptogee (75) · 6 years ago

What I'm happy about:

Updated account creation rules.

Curation tweaks. :-)

What I'm sad about.

Zero frontend changes, still no groups, trending page dominated by paid content, tags still a mess :-(

$0.00

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

i hope I'm not speaking out of turn here, but I think the HF has to go down first before we can have Hivemind/Communities, which is what I'm understanding you to mean from front end changes and groups.

$0.00

smitop (52) · 6 years ago

The hardfork doesn't have anything to do with Hivemind or communities. Most of the community things are done via custom_json ops, which were always supported.

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, @smitop.

I guess I could have worded my comment better. What I was getting at was, the HF was going to come first. Then, anything after, including Hivemind/Community. Just trying to establish the order and the fact the HF doesn't do what can be handled otherwise. Thanks for clarifying.

$0.00

cryptogee (75) · 6 years ago

It's called HF20 because there have been 19 other hardforks before it, for at least the last 3 we have been promised communities.

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Seems to be all kinds of promising going on that took forever or has yet to be fulfilled. :) Okay. So, just trying to say that it sounds like to me that Communities isn't a blockchain level change, so it's not a part of a HF, but from what I've read, it is supposed to follow this particular HF. That is, if they keep their promise this time. :) With Hivemind 1.0 is already set up, so we're waiting on HIvemind 1.5 so Communities can be laid down.

bryan-imhoff (66) · 6 years ago

Exactly my understanding. Hivemind is already on the live production servers. We’re using it now, there’s just no UI. Only once HF20 opens up user signups will it become practical to launch features that could kindle a widespread adoption.

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Hey, thanks, @bryan-imhoff. I think you managed to say in one comment what I've been trying to say but probably still didn't with two. :) I appreciate the back up/follow up/confirmation.

muksihs (52) · 6 years ago

Is there a public Hivemind API?

$0.00

andrarchy (72) · 6 years ago (edited)

Yup, this is pretty accurate. Hivemind and SMTs are in parallel development and are of equally high priority. Like HF20 we have been working on these things for a very long time, and much of the work is done. But also like HF20 a lot of pieces have to be put in place before the "bow can be tied."

glenalbrethsen (68) · 6 years ago

Thanks, @andrarchy. It's good to hear about the progress being made on all fronts. Even if we do seem to get impatient from time to time, it's mostly well intended, I believe. I know I'm not technical enough to really grasp what's going on Github, so I basically rely on those who know it/do it to explain where things are and such. So, thank you, directly, for your involvement, and all the others, as well as for these updates.

$0.00

Show 3 more replies

timcliff (73) · 6 years ago (edited)

It's called HF20 because there have been 19 other hardforks before it, for at least the last 3 we have been promised communities.

Just to clarify - communities are not going to be done via a hardfork. It is an application level change that is being worked on independently of the blockchain updates/hardforks.

$0.00

hafiz34 (66) · 6 years ago

Seems like a lot of changes are coming and it will make the platform a much better one. Lots of brain behind these! !

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

jsantana (70) · 6 years ago

I'm ready for another HF. Congrats and good luck to all Steem team!

$0.00

lichtblick (78) · 6 years ago

Very cool. Thanks for the date and your hard work guys.
Resteemed :-)

$0.00

resiliencia (68) · 6 years ago

Great job guys!
Thank you! 😊

$0.00

mrosenquist (70) · 6 years ago

Some great changes there team! Nice to see innovation continues to move forward. Keep up the good work.

$0.00

blockdaily (42) · 6 years ago

thank you
it's good news for steemit community

$0.00

muksihs (52) · 6 years ago

After the HF20 deployment, are there any plans to go ahead and do a soft fork for the follows/followers "UA/User Authority" user ranking method to replace the existing and vote/flag based "Reputation" user ranking method?

$0.00

hiroyamagishi (68) · 6 years ago

Buy the low price of Steem it is the best contender to any other cryptos in marker

$0.00

vikisecrets (68) · 6 years ago (edited)

Looking forward to the new Hardfork :) One front-end feature request, that is especially interesting when prices are falling: add an option to allow the rewards to be displayed in native Steem instead of (Steem) Dollars. This would make the rewards also more stable and independent of price fluctuations.

$0.00

hilarski (76) · 6 years ago

Bring it on, thank you for an update team!

$0.00

deanliu (77) · 6 years ago (edited)

Fantastic update! Thanks for such a detailed report, making us feel excited during this cold period of crypto.

I was actually expecting the change to the author/curator reward ratio from 75/25 to like 50/50 but did not see this one, maybe this is not yet a mature proposal... (well, I am neural on this one as I have no idea it's really better, but a change always means that we can gather more information of how this system can work better though...)

By the way, I think one of the titles - Self-voting Rewards should be reconsidered, as the paragraph is talking about the change of the rule for early-voting curation reward distribution, not just about self-voting.

$0.00

brian-rhodes (66) · 6 years ago

Nice work. Another milestone for the platform and the timing is strategic.

$0.00

paulcaraway (58) · 6 years ago

Always good to see the evolution of a program... especially one you believe in and use! Keep up the great work and making changes to move forward!

$0.00

khanza.aulia (69) · 6 years ago

this update is very good. With this hope it can improve the quality of curation from curators, with the same prize distribution as a content writer. but a lot of what I haven't understood about this hardfork, I have to read it over and over again to understand it.

$0.00

https://steemit.com/witness/@ats-witness/steem-hardfork-20-thoughts-on-velocity

ats-david (74) · 6 years ago (edited)

Here are my thoughts on the proposed hardfork. I invite any comments and critiques.

$0.00

the01crow (63) · 6 years ago

Its awesome , great work

$0.00

wesleybos (44) · 6 years ago

I have been waiting for this for a long long time really looking forward to it nice work!!

$0.00

katrina-ariel (65) · 6 years ago

Well this is exciting. Thanks very much for the update, and thanks to everyone who is working on the evolution of the Steem blockchain!

$0.00

enginewitty (72) · 6 years ago

I absolutely love the cool down vs the lockout. Kudos!

$0.00

greece-lover (80) · 6 years ago

So even more power for the top 20 witnesses, because that's all I can read...

$0.00

blocktrades (74) · 6 years ago

What threatening power did you read? Looks like just more responsibilty/work for witnesses, but it's not exactly a "power" I'm thrilled to have: being required to vote on how many accounts can be created for free.

$0.00

greece-lover (80) · 6 years ago

More work? More responsibility? With a princely payment of 100,000 SP per year, the effort is quite well rewarded. For me, the dog handler means even more fake account, whether with SP behind or not. The current number of members is not already rushing behind and in front. The shortening of the curation time and this does not count the curation with a Selvotes brings only an increase in value for the BidBot offerers.

$0.00

mightyblueberry (55) · 6 years ago

You clearly much prefer to collect Steem and SBD (Steem Bullshit Dollars) from your massive delegations to bots. Your delegated Steem Power is one of the reasons the front page is full of crap. Enjoy the price fall, the bottom is still far away.

$0.00

airmatti (63) · 6 years ago

Welcome HF20!!

$0.00

steemitromney (53) · 6 years ago

Hey @steemitblog Team. Thanks for the great update. What is your stance on the use and existence of bid bots? There is a lot going on in the back but I don't see how HF20 has any impact on improving the frontpage content. We wait for SMT?

$0.00

cranium (76) · 6 years ago

Hooray!!! Finally!!!

$0.00

blessed-girl (70) · 6 years ago

Greetings, this year I created my steemit account, and I have not really understood it completely ... I usually vote at 20 minutes, but from what I read in this post it is better to vote after 30 minutes? Could you clarify that doubt? Of course then in September those 30 minutes will be reduced ...

Another thing I want to help me, 3 times have given me downvoto, and I analyzed in the account that gave me the downvoto, are accounts that create that day and is dedicated to vote for everybody negative, is that legal? or there is an account or label where one can complain and accuse these people because I think they do it with malintention ... they are accounts exclusively for negative votes.

$0.00

arcange (73) · 6 years ago

Congratulations @steemitblog!
Your post was mentioned in the Steemit Hit Parade in the following categories:

Comments - Ranked 1 with 219 comments
Pending payout - Ranked 7 with $ 192,28

$0.00

joythewanderer (78) · 6 years ago

Good job, Steemit team. Looking forward to HF 20!
This post is featured on today's Joy News (in Chinese :D)

$0.00

techcoderx (64) · 6 years ago

Thank you for sharing the news on the blockchain. We found this one interesting, therefore we featured this article on our Episode 13 of SteemTechShow!

Click the image below to watch the video:

$0.00

loreennaa (66) · 6 years ago

I love the changes <3 <3

$0.00

angielb (64) · 6 years ago

$0.00

sift666 (65) · 6 years ago

Thanks - Now I've read about Hardfork 20 I have learned that geeks live in a different world to me and I don't ever want to get lost in it...

$0.00

shortsegments (77) · 6 years ago

LOL 🤣

$0.00

psylanthropist (52) · 6 years ago

This is incredible. Dtube live.. I'd be surprised if you upvoted this comment. nice account. cheers

$0.00

thenuclear (43) · 6 years ago

why the steemdollar marked here? is this post have any problem!

$0.00

https://steemit.com/steem/@novacadian/a-decentralized-capcha-annonymous-proof-of-brain-verification

novacadian (58) · 6 years ago

After Velocity, upvotes and downvotes will both be allowed during the last 12 hours of the payout period, but their strength (for the same amount of voting power) will decrease linearly from 100% to 0% over that 12-hour period.

It appears that software mechanics are available to make my decentralized anonymous CAPCHA system a reality, so as to give greater value to upvotes to users who choose to use it.

A link to an old blog post of mine which fleshed out the idea is included below for your reading pleasure.

$0.00

bsfmalaysia (63) · 6 years ago

Too complicated for laymen to understand

$0.00

shortsegments (77) · 6 years ago

Hi Steemitblog,
Thank you for the detailed explanation of the changes coming with HardFork 20.
I have noticed some of the bid-bots have stopped excepting bids before the 30 minute mark, so this change is already having an effect.
Keep Steeming👍

$0.00