— SteemCN

RE: Moving to hive

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Moving to hive

berniesanders (77) in steemit • 7 years ago

And what's wrong with that? Other than the people complaining not being aware and mining...

steemit

7 years ago by berniesanders (77)

$0.04

1 vote

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

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago

Absolutely nothing. I am not one of those that said it is wrong. Right place, right time.

$0.03

1 vote

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

It IS wrong. See my comment below.

$0.00

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

It's wrong because as soon as Steemit launched they killed the mining. That means that since Steemit launched there was no other way to make money on this system unless you buy from a "pre miner" or get upvoted by a "pre miner".
In other words - all money that is created - and will be created - everyday on steemit for author and curation rewards is only from these few miners. They created all money and it now duplicates according to their SP. They decided and will decide who gets rewarded. So there was no chance since Steemit got live, to make ANY money without support of these few people.

$0.02

1 vote

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago

Actually mining kept going for quite some time after steemit launch. Though it didn't really matter. Though we cannot fault someone from being in the right place at the right time. That is not their fault, so they actually did nothing wrong. It was a lack of thinking through the rammifications of dumping some super powerful people into a new ecosystem that was not truly worked out I think. Not surprising, this is the first of its kind.

$0.03

1 vote

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

They didn't do anything wrong, the system is wrong. I wrote a post about how to fix it: https://steemit.com/steemit/@emble/will-steem-succeed-or-commit-suicide
I do think that the value of steem wont pickup unless a major change is made.

$0.44

3 votes

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago (edited)

Each curation member has his Curation Reputation Tag. The more upvotes the posts - he curated first or from the first - gets - plus his continuous curation - the more his reputation grows. A member with a higher reputation is like a lot voters with lower reputations.

This is actually a problem with the current curation system. People begin to dogpile popular people. It is part of why the curation system is broken now. People who pick the topics that will do well. Of course they will do well if the curators keep always picking the same people. It is a sure fire reward, but it is crap for the platform.

no curation bots should be allowed

No way to detect them so you can't really make them not allowed. All they are is code to act like people. So any detection attempts will also flag people and once learned can be circumvented. So you cannot eliminate bots. That is why they haven't been.

Downvoting should be made by at least 3 curators with a minimum curation reputation.

This can be easily gamed. By the method you have defined curation reputation can be easily farmed.

The current reputation system is the only thing that seems to have a limited effect against abusers. It is not perfect. Yet to gain reputation you can only gain in reputation when someone higher reputation than you up votes you. You can only lose reputation when someone higher reputation than you down votes you.

As you climb in reputation the advancement becomes slower and slower as there are fewer people above you to help you increase.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

There should be something like a simple captcha to upvote, so that bots could not vote.
From what I understand, reputation is mostly affected by SP. People with high SP can ruin reputation of people with less SP. For example you with your 72 reputation can't downvote a post that has $100 to 0 because you don't have enough SP. Correct me if I'm wrong.

$0.39

2 votes

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago

Captcha would work if steem blockchain was centralized... it isn't. There are many different ways to access it beyond steemit, and growing. Most bots don't even actually go through steemit, though they can. Captchas work great on centralized systems where the only way to access them is through one web page. Yet centralization makes it vulnerable to take down.

$0.00

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

I'm sure there is some way, we just need to be creative.

$0.08

1 vote

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago (edited)

Code is easy to circumvent in MA NY cases, and can introduce new issues in others. A lot of our solutions can be done by the community by people, as opposed to trying to force it with code.

$0.00

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago

For example you with your 72 reputation can't downvote a post that has $100 to 0 because you don't have enough SP. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Correct. At 100% my power is worth somewhere between $3 and $4 right now so that is the most I could reduce a post.

$0.00

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

So that means that the current system is. The higher the SP the more power you have to downvote and ruin reputations.

$0.08

1 vote

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago

I could harm reputations if I down voted. I generally find almost no reason worth down voting.

$0.00

Show 7 more replies

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago

I'll read your post.

$0.00

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

Thank you.

$0.00

[-]

valued-customer (67) · 7 years ago

I think that there are rules about how you can offer securities to the public, and that the mining of Steem at the outset, and then ending mining, is wrong, because it disadvantages folks after the cut off.

If the mined Steem had been relegated to the rewards pool then there would be no issue, as no individual person would have been able to enrich themselves from mining.

That clearly isn't the case, even though @dan said he intended to disburse his mining proceeds later. He has retained it.

Caveat: I am not a lawyer, have no legal opinions that any sane person would respect, and neither want any of this to happen.

I want Steemit to succeed grandly, and do to Fakebook what Fakebook did to Myspace.

$0.08

1 vote

[-]

dwinblood (73) · 7 years ago

then ending mining, is wrong, because it disadvantages folks after the cut off.

Before it was cut off a few had determined pretty much how to corner it from what I was reading so there was not really much benefit for new miners. I could be completely wrong here, but I vaguely recall people talking about something like this.

$0.05

1 vote

[-]

shla-rafia (68) · 7 years ago

really sad

$0.00

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago (edited)

People don't realize that, and just say that the minnows are jealous. Steemit is the most unfair system after (or maybe even before) communism. All money goes to these few on top or their friends. And they are also very generous to throw a bone from time to time to some of the 95% minnows.
Even curation rewards - that were meant to incentive the finders of good work - is a joke. These whales can be the last upvoters on a post after 5000 upvotes, and they will still get more then everyone without doing nothing.

$0.41

4 votes

[-]

shla-rafia (68) · 7 years ago

In bitshares I often read that we should make a mutual aid society where people help each other and Dan once sent me 25 dollar when I needed help. I think he created the system in the believe that other peopke would have the same morals but they dont. But i have a bit of depression and cannot think clear and also have to go and sleep outside again. cu and thanks.

$0.30

2 votes

[-]

igster (63) · 7 years ago

@elfspice is attempting to reboot the system - interesting to see what happens. Will Steem finally be adopted by the majority of crypto users?

$0.00

[-]

emble (50) · 7 years ago

It will not be Steem, it has a different name.

$0.00

[-]

igster (63) · 7 years ago

oh yes, calibrae.

$0.00