Why whales are needed - and a proposal to insure the massive success of steemit, ie Subtractive Upvoting Gradient

in upvoting •  8 years ago  (edited)

Amid all the complaints about unfair rewards, etc. I wanted to explain why I think the fact that we have whales is a big reason why steemit has become so successful so quickly.

First, let me state that I am not any whale and all the STEEM I have was paid for with BTC and earned from my "taker" bot which is one of the few market maker bots that dont do wash trades. I have gotten a mega post and a decent reward post, but most of my posts get a few dollars.

There are some fundamental forces that ensure that there will always be whales, ie entropy, pareto, etc. So love them or hate them, we need to get used to them and since there seems to be enough of the latter, I will focus on the former.

Why should we love the whales? The answer is that whales create a focus and without a focus everything will be blurry. What I mean is that if we imagine a steem without whales, or even dolphins, what would it be like? Everybody's upvote would be the same. That sounds fair, but as an initial condition it has quite the undesired effect of fizzling out. What sort of headline would be "makeup blog post gets $7.77" while I like the 777 number, it wont get much buzz going. Sure, the sustainable average reward per post might well be in the $7.77 range, maybe $77.7 but there cant be an average of $777, not if there will be tens of thousands of posts per day. That is the macroeconomic reality.

Steem could very easily double its userbase each year for 10 years and sustain the current market price of STEEM, if not have it go up multiples as the userbase grows exponentially, but at some point it will reach a steady state equilibrium and the average amount per post will stabilize. Where that is, nobody knows yet.

So back to the whales. Why is it OK for a single upvote be worth $100 while most newbie upvotes are a penny or less? The reason is the chaos that is certain if all newbies had the same voting power before they adopt a common set of guidelines on how to upvote, downvote, etc. In fact, it is unlikely that any large number of people can ever agree on anything.

So, during the "big bang" period of steemit we need a non-homogeneous universe composed of whale upvotes, which act as attractors for additional posts. From that the raw energy will congregate around these whale attractors and condense into galaxies of content that revolved around the original whale attractor.

Doesnt that mean the current whales essentially won the lottery. Yes.
However, if your only complaint was "why wasnt I one of the whales", well the answer is that you werent in the right place at the right time with the right set of skills. It happens, that's life.

Now, moving forward as long as the whale's power flows to the dolphins and that flows to the minnows and there is a way for newcomers to climb the ladder with hard work, then steemit will succeed. However, if the whales create a closed circle among themselves and only upvote for each other, this will not lead to a galaxy of content.

So, I have a proposal. Adjust the upvoting reward to discourage whale for whale upvoting. I am sure @theoretical can come up with some clever algorithm that will reduce the power of a whale for whale upvoting. That will then motivate the whales to upvote for non-whales, ie dolphins and minnows and that will lead to a new generation of whales out of the current dolphins and new dolphins from the current minnows. Something like: Make the effective SP (SP of voter - SP of poster), with a minnow minimum so the whales can feel what it is like to be a minnow just by upvoting for a bigger whale. But notice that the whale's upvote using the difference in SP has most of the desired effect! In fact, it will bias whales to vote for the minnow over the dolphin, for the dolphin over small whales and why use up any power voting for bigger whales.

Even though the effective SP for the upvote is a reduced value, it should have the same effect as now as far as the dilution goes, so there is a cost for whale upvoting whale. This then ensures a steady flow of the whale upvotes to smaller and all the way down the chain, as a dolphin is now incentivized to upvote a minnow over another dolphin. Once there is an incentivized way that through continuous effort and interacting with the community a minnow can become a dolphin can become a whale, then steemit will have no obstacles to growing to millions of users.

James
#steemit-ideas #steemit #steem #steemit-adoption

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:  

Very insightful, the lottery aspect of posts payout may play an important role in Steemit's success. It's so much more motivating to know that a few hundred thousand bucks will be distributed today by chunks of 10k, 1k and 100 to the handful of most popular posts, and that everyone else will get smaller "consolation prize" payouts of a few cents to a few dozen bucks. This keeps the dream alive that someday one could be the one who wins the jackpot. And I think the relatively mundane content of top earning posts also helps sending the message that really anyone could strike gold.

Definitely the lotto behavior is very important, not only because it parallel's standard PoW mining, but as you say normal people see posts which anybody can make in 5 minutes make enough to pay rent (or living expenses for a year!) then they will at least try it.

THAT is the biggest hurdle, so if only we can retain the people that try it, then exponential subscriber growth is very likely.

My analysis is that the envy factor is the biggest obstacle, so anything that doesnt break the overall steemit but reduces the envy factor is helpful. And by making it clear the whale's are here to help the dolphins and the dolphins to help the minnows, it changes from an haves vs have-nots, to everybody is in the same boat and so highlighting success stories of minnow to dolphin to whale will be quite important.

And the best way to get the impression that steemit is about promoting minnows into dolphins into whales is to setup the math to be biased to do that.

So far, I have been quite impressed with the responsiveness of steemit to constructive criticisms. I have been harping on the unfairness and well, brokenness of the liquidity rewards. So of course as soon as I get a bot that is able to get 2% of the rewards, it is suspended :)

But it is all for the improving of steemit, and that is what we all need to work toward. Steemit will have to ignored the obvious things that need to be done to NOT become bigger than bitcoin. I view my job to identify and continue to highlight these obvious things that to an outsider coming into steemit like myself is easy to see, while people here since the beginning it is natural to get used to "the way things are" and not be so keen to change what made them lots of money.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Sybil.

Well certainly if the big whales go out of their way to make sybil accounts just so they can upvote for it, at least it is more work for them to do. And since they already have a lot of SP, is it really worth for them to do this?

What percentage of the whales do you estimate would make sybil accounts just so they can upvote for themselves? Even if we cant prevent it, we can at least stigmatize it

It's not even whales who would benefit from Sybil. Anyone could attack the platform that way.

I still dont understand how using a subtractive effective SP makes it rate limiting...
It only reduces the power for upvoting someone with a lot of SP, even if the subtractive factor is sqrt(SP author) it biases upvoting to the smaller SP authors.
There can be a million sybil accounts, but what does that gain? The whales have to vote for them and if a whale is voting for newbie accounts that he controls, this will be noticed wouldnt it? especially if the content is weak. So then he needs to hire writers to create useful content, in which case it creates useful content
Maybe I wasnt clear that this was just to reduce upvote power and not to increase it, so whatever attack you say it has, the existing system can be attacked the same way with more power

i must need more coffee. could you explain where the attack is?

Anyone could mine and / or create accounts for relatively cheap. Even at the current difficulty levels now, you can mine 10 names a day (if not more) for a month at only 60 USD. That's 300 names for 60 USD. Now, do that with 15 servers (less than a grand) and you have 4500 names.

Then, it's relatively simple to write scripts to upvote content and you have sybil. Once you have a limiting rate effect of SP, you invite this type of attack.

In addition, it adds additional strain on network.

Id expect most of the current whales got to be whales by mining, and my (admittedly poor) understanding is that you need many miners to be able to run mining all the time, because your miners can't mine while theyre in line to have their pow accepted by a witness.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Even then we would be more "attractive" to the outside world when they see that power is not centralized to a couple of whales but spread to more accounts (I mean at least marketing wise it would be better)

this graph is not yet so much encouraging... I hope the numbers will change and give as a more decentralized feeling in the near future...

https://steemd.com/distribution

Ideally each category would have approx the same stake. It seems my proposal is not liked by a couple of whales who have downvoted this post :(

I am sure that the percentages will equalize. Maybe the .14% will become the 1%. We can only pray.

So, I have a proposal. Adjust the upvoting reward to discourage whale for whale upvoting. I am sure @theoretical can come up with some clever algorithm that will reduce the power of a whale for whale upvoting.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

@jl777 make this paragraph bold using 2 asterisk (*) before and 2 asterisk next to the sentence !
https://guides.github.com/features/mastering-markdown/

It would be nice if the downvoters would at least make a comment as to why they downvoted.

whales are good! The whales become whales by sound voting is even better... here are my thoughts on how to do it.
Every one ,including whales can start with 10% of their current Steem Power as Curation Power.

I don't quite understand how you're going to "insure" the success of steemit....who's going to to take on this insurance policy?

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

I dont mean insurance in a literal sense, but in a practical sense. The only negative I am hearing about steemit is that the whales have too much power, but as I write, this power is needed. So, like in the real world, the millionaires all do charity work. That way the masses accept them as they directly or indirectly benefit from the massively wealthy.

Already steemit is close to a viral propagation and explosion, so if the retention rate issue is solved, then that "insures" its success based on the fact that people like money. So if to choose between not getting paid and posting on facebook or posting on steemit and getting paid, then most will choose the latter. All that is needed is for there to be no big negative, like envy.

but if the entire system is tilted so that the rich upvote for the less rich, all the way down the line, the envy part is for the most part squelched.

not sure why you downvoted my post??? [he un-downvoted!]

i upvoted, will you be my friend lol.

Seriously though, you guys have so much power. i saw several of you upvote comments and they got nearly $300 in 7 votes? it's confusing but i wish i got struck by the all mighty whales.

thar she blows

Steemit & Steem isn't all about upvoting, the whole system is growing. The fact tat whales upvote or note will be more irrelevant on the future.

I think you mean "ensure"

Its a mad house here , the only ones who can insure the success of steemit are whales as they are the ones who are the most invested in the platform but currently they are not doing something which can be applauded.

thank you for changing your downvote! I really am trying to help all the whales and steemit in general and similar to the NXT founder's the steemit founders will be plagued by enormous amounts of envy. If this isnt addressed, I fear that steemit growth will get a ceiling and really it isnt that much to sacrifice for the whales to only get upvotes from bigger whales. Maybe @ned would be gracious and upvote the whales who are not getting appropriate upvotings due to a change like this

With your help my business and this walk, but I still get missing funds. Meet concerned https://steemit.com/crowdfunding/@webocel/58kd3g-my-dream-needs-your-vote-crowdfunding
And look how I'm going to invest the money https://steemit.com/crowdfunding/@webocel/thanks-steem-my-business-is-starting-look-what-buy-their-votes-crowdfunding
(voting this comment you are also helping)
sorry for the spam but I'm desperate for funds to be self employed
Thanks in advance. Nicolas

I think @jl777 was looking for this...

I think that's a great idea. Not sure how the whales will like it.

most all the whales want what is best for the long term and my proposal will lead to a much better outcome than whatever short term gains they can get by self-upvoting within the whalepod

The more the whales giveaway, the more they will end up with. @berniesanders understands this and he is already creating a strange and wonderful galaxy around his "crazy" upvotings

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

I was thinking about another idea, give an upvote bonus to new comers or people who never won much and decrease that bonus for people who have already good earnings. In a way it's more or less the same.

some sort of pool that gets posts with the minimum amount of positive feedback at least a "minimum wage" level payout, yes this sort of thing. But the primary source of upvote revenues are the whales, so by preventing whale for whale upvoting, it would force them to upvote for non-whales.

@cryptodrive makes a good argument for delegating voting power to a degree that would offset this issue in a bit more of a controlled way instead of waiting for the power to 'trickle down'. Worth a read...

https://steemit.com/money/@thecryptodrive/steemit-whales-stockpile-sp-government-spending-analogy-and-the-solution-revealed#@thecryptodrive/re-fleetinuance-re-thecryptodrive-steemit-whales-stockpile-sp-government-spending-analogy-and-the-solution-revealed-20160721t223758597z

I still like my idea of curation power to be earned by good curation.
To not hurt the whales we can start with 10% of the Steem Power of each account as Curation Power.

"Everybody's upvote would be the same. That sounds fair, but as an initial condition it has quite the undesired effect of fizzling out."

Plus voting can be sybil-attacked with fake voting / fake ids... so money-backed voting has already solved that issue.

test

you can actually do that? vote on your own comment and earn? how did you do it? amazing

I upvoted, but I don't see the issue you are describing playing out that often. The whales upvote what they like. There are times when another whale post something other whales like.

Creating a rule preventing someone (a whale) from voting how they wish is not something I can get behind. If it is a real issue that actually exist and actually causes a problem, I think the whales here at Steem will handle that manually themselves just fine.

From what I've seen here, especially on Slack, the whales discuss issues like this and a solution is agreed upon and then it just happens naturally without some hardcoded rule being put into place. I think the same thing will happen in this instance without forcing people to vote a certain way.

Even though it isnt happening, the rumors are spreading that steemit is a whale on whale upvote-fest. Also, the fact that slack has been closed to new members for weeks does not help the closed circle impression that really does exist outside the steemit community. I am sorry to bring the bad news that steemit isnt 100% perfect, but the first step to solving a problem is to admit that it exists.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

the rumors are spreading that steemit is a whale on whale upvote-fest

Obviously you can't always rationally explain rumors but where is the evidence of this? I don't even see most whales posting at all, much less posting and getting undeserved votes from other whales. I do post comments pretty often and it is exceedingly rare they ever get votes from other whales.

there is no evidence of this at all, in fact I think a bigger issue is that most whales are relatively inactive, which is an issue that can hopefully be solved too.

The fact that there is no evidence against it is probably not good enough. Maybe if evidence to prove it isnt happening was made, that could help, but given the envy factor I think anything short of a proactive charity type of policy encoded in the algorithms, outsiders will just make stuff up to convince themselves steemit cant be real.

If you just go to places outside of steemit island you will hear people see the envy factor expressed as "unfair payouts" is the primary (only?) negative.

Okay I agree that rumors can be a real issue even if untrue. The rumor of whale-on-whale upvoting just surprises me since there isn't even grain of truth to it as far as I can tell. Most rumors start with something.

some preliminary stats have some interesting data, but I need some info on key block heights, will PM

If it isnt an issue in reality, then what is the downside for doing it? It will have tremendous positive PR effects.
Also whales are not prevented from upvoting anyone, the system would just reduce the power. This is already being done based on how many minutes from the initial post, how many others have upvoted, so its not like we are not already tweaking the voting power

There is a real issue of envy. Maybe as a whale you prefer not to see this, but yet it is there. Ask the people who started and then stopped posting on steemit. I imagine the majority will say the unfair payouts. [Yes, I know steemit still pays out more than any other blogging site, but people are strange sometimes]

So, if steemit can say that the entire system is biased so the upvoting flows downstream, this will go a long way toward reducing the envy factor

Of course whales are essential to the model. They bring in the the massive injection of long term funding that Steemit needs to operate.

I think the problem comes when a newbie comes and create some content , he doesn't have this in mind that I want to create content which would get whale's upvote but he wants other users to like it but what happens is that when he sees another post which may not be popular among most users but only with whales on the trending page with that huge payout his outlook changes. He is now more concerned with coming up with content that may get him whales upvote rather than content what he likes to create.

keep in mind that during the initial stages of the universe, it wasnt a very nice place to be, all that cosmic radiation. If you constrain a system to have to be perfect for its entire duration, then it needs to magically appear as a perfect solution. Seems a bit unlikely though quantum mechanics says that anything is possible.

However, I prefer a system that is good enough to being with that is incrementally improved. We have what we have and since my timemachine is broken, cant change the past. So from here, making the incremental improvements is the key.

It would be good if each whale picked some speciality they liked so can act as a magnet for that sort of content. There are a few hundred whales, depending on where the cutoff is, so that is room for quite a lot of different categories

The steem idea was about decentralization , and what we see here is cartel formation.

no
the reason is that each whale on his/her own creates a magnetic attractor

I need whales , im so addictive to this and craving for like crazy already . maybe im not good in writing i think .
Feel free to drop by in my blog and comment what is lacks in my post :/

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Suggested TAGS for your post....
#steemit-ideas #steemit #steem #steemit-adoption

thanks! I never put the #tags in my posts till now. I thought adding it to the tags section did that. is there an advantage to putting #steemit into the body of the post?

adding it to the tags section is enough (not noticed)

Great write up as always James. I think this would be a good starting point, but I feel there's something else that needs to be addressed regarding whales apart from what you described.

I noticed you lightly commented on this, but what happens when the biggest whales become inactive? There should be a reversal of Steem Power if whales become inactive and that SP be reallocated to more active dolphins or whales.

Another issue I see moving forward that may also need to be addressed is: how do we keep the whale content varied? I think there are dangers in relying on whale up-votes for front page content. Imagine if for some reason a whale sold his account to a large corporation. That corporation would possibly have the power to determine front page content.

I'm starting to believe that, ultimately, the best choice for whales would be to become automated bots and out of the control of a single person.

of course, there are many layers more to fix, but one step at a time. impossible to know the ultimate solution, but that is not needed. we just need to make the most powerful improvement with the least risk (effort) and incrementally converge to the ultimate solution.

right now is the "big bang" phase and what matters is user growth and retention. Once we have so many new members, then is the time to solve the things you mention.

I agree with most of your post, but I think the proposal may be unnecessary.

  1. Whales should have equal opportunity to post and be rewarded for good content. They're community members just like anyone else.
  2. If whales self-vote too often it doesn't look good for perception so I think there is already a mechanism in place to prevent that. It will be likely other whales, dolphins & minnows would counteract whale self-voting and not vote for a self-voting whales often.
  3. Over time it's all about re-allocating the 10% distribution every year. If you self vote you can maintain your percentage relatively speaking, but other whales will be doing more to increase the value of the ecosystem. Although the whales that vote for others will dilute themselves and their % allocations will decrease gradually over time, they'll be getting a smaller percentage of a much bigger pie. Hence the incentives are already there to grow the pie.

Only the largest of the whales would feel much impact from this and regardless of what is actually happening, the perception of insiders rewarding insiders will happen. That is human nature. We have a TRUSTLESS system here, so why rely on needing to trust that the whales act in the ways they should?

Upvote, i think we need whales because they give steem direction by give their voting to an article thats they think its needed the most on steemit

I feel so dim his is so hard to understand, I'm new so searching for as much information but b the more I read the more I have to read. I haven't posted as yet as still very unsure on how this works.

dont worry, I am discussing deep internals and how the steemit machinery is working. As a user, just blog away what you are able to write knowledgeably about. I hear puppy pictures are also helpful.

The whole point of steemit is that ordinary non-technical people can simply start posting and make a bit of money, which is something that you cant do with reddit or facebook.

I am trying to be me technical, hopefully all the techy stiff will click and be a lot easier but like you say I can always post puopy post for the time being

If you want to be technical, the best way is to start with: https://steem.io/SteemWhitePaper.pdf
just skip over the heavy math parts, still you will get a good feel for how it all works

That's great thanks, me and math don't mix very well.

Thanks James

Good and interesting ideas as usual. Glad you're on steemit!

I agree with your opinion. Historically when money flowed from top to the bottom, then society became powerful. Adjusting upvoting reward is worth a shot.

Terrible idea.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

can you elaborate? The distribution chart is quite top heavy, so this issue wont go away by itself

It might well be the proposed formula can be improved by making it nonlinear, like effective SP = (SP upvoter - sqrt(SP author)), that would be a much softer effect and even upvoting @ned would be positive for the top 200 whales. And also the non-whales might need some sane limits.

I thought downvotes were to be used only for extreme cases and not for squelching terrible ideas. If all the whales downvoted everything they thought was a terrible idea, they would get a terrible reputation. I mean if the idea is so terrible, it would die on its own, right?

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Does the distribution chart include the 'steemit' account? That isn't a real account at all in the sense that it doesn't post, doesn't vote, and isn't an actual person. It is part of the bootstrapping capital structure and distribution model of Steemit/Steem. Those coins are effectively 'undistributed', much like the portion of Bitcoin's supply that hasn't been mined yet. It really has nothing to do with aquatic life.

EDIT: the steemit account is excluded

I dont think it does. the top 40 accounts look to be averaging about 2500 MV each so that totals 100,000 and steemit is ~250K, so with the rest of the aqualife adding to about 40%, that would mean all the <1000MV accounts total either ~60K MV or nearly 200K MV

I confirmed the steemit account is excluded.

understood, this post have to be shared to users who dont seem to stop whining about the whales

glad to see people discussing this!

I didn't understand much about whales or dolphins in the technical/internet/steem sense. I am a newb and I don't expect to "get paid" or get rich quick. I up vote things because I like them.

No entendi

  ·  8 years ago Reveal Comment
  ·  8 years ago (edited)Reveal Comment
  ·  8 years ago Reveal Comment
  ·  8 years ago Reveal Comment
  ·  8 years ago Reveal Comment
  ·  8 years ago Reveal Comment
  ·  8 years ago Reveal Comment