If I was a bankster, this is how I would sabotage the Steem blockchain
As a bankster, I am deeply concerned about the steem blockchain as my fiat currency cannot compete and as such is in major trouble. Cryptocurrencies threaten to over take my debt based tool I use to control, steal and manipulate the economy and all those involved with it. I cannot flood the steem blockchain with more steem because I cannot print more with the stroke of my keyboard. That process is automated, distributed and out of my control, where my fiat currency process is centralized and completely under my control. I also cannot create debt either. All the tools that I've used for hundreds of years have been rendered obsolete. I am in big trouble as my fiat, debt based currency cannot compete.
Something must be done!
I cannot attack it from the outside, so I must do it within. There is one tool that I can use and it involves my knowledge of human behaviour. The humans are so predictable, I most likely won't have to do much to win. In fact, I could probably get them to do the work for me without them even realizing it.
I could relaxo on my rancho and watch the fire works.
Step 1 - buy steem so that I can be in a position of influence. 1.3 million steem should do the trick. Schedule about 4 months to acquire that much steem.
Step 2 - look for somebody I can manipulate and feed his greed. Somebody who only posts about money fits in very well with my plans. He would make a great scape goat for people to hate and he would be easy to manipulate.
Step 3 - upvote my pawn each chance I get to feed the greed and rake in the steem. I will only support him and nobody else in order to maximize my influence. I can make a tidy profit at the same time too!
Step 4 - protect the pawn and watch the fire works.
The probability of this working is mixed as it all depends on how people react to my hidden plans. It will work brilliantly if people behave the way I predict they will. People hate greed as it produces envy. They will attack it when they find it. I know this to be true because I've seen it time and again throughout history.
Because this blockchain technology functions under anarchy principles, I suspect that people will resort to violence to protect it. There is no centralized authority to govern behaviour, so people will resort to their own internal governance paradigms. My objective is to escalate the violence to diminish the reputation of the platform. The more violent I can make it, the less people will want to use it.
But there are several big problems with my plan. If people suddenly realize what I'm doing, the gig is up. If people don't fall for my bate and continue building the community then I will have to walk away. If there are people who encourage and support a high level of ethics and morality, it could derail my plans; especially if they influence others to walk the path of peace.
The reason this will cause my failure is due to the way the blockchain works and because nobody can control it. Once millions of people get onto the blockchain, it would be impossible for one or even a small group of people to gain control.
It is critical that I prevent full scale acceptance of the platform. Once a specific threshold of acceptance and participation is met, my influence will not be enough to over come and take over the platform. The technology prevents censorship, centralization or any other techniques I've used in the past. I cannot control it outside of the system, so my only hope is to destroy it from within.
My only hope of obtaining that destruction from within is to cause chaos to prevent acceptance. Chaos would scare people away, create a loss of hope, low moral and as a result, the loss of acceptance of the platform will result in it's demise.
However, if hope floats and people over come their bias, focus on building a decentralized community, find ways to resolve their own disputes in a peaceful way, help new users by paying it forward and built a high level of acceptance and trust, then it matters not what I do. My plan will fail!
That is the plan from a physical point of view.
My REAL plan is spiritual, hidden and very obscure. If I can get people to sell their soul by resorting to violence, name calling, anger, hate, frustration and suffering, then my master would be most pleased with me! War is very profitable from a spiritual point of view as we can harvest from both sides!
Here is a quote from Minority Report (2002) movie
John Anderton: There's nothing wrong with the system, it is perfect.
Danny Witwer: perfect. I agree. But if there's a flaw, it's human. It always is.
This thread started good and became bad.
You ignore the greater evils, and I do not consider the whale you refer to, nor his protege as evil.
This comment has received a 30.67 % upvote from @steemdiffuser thanks to: @stimialiti. Steem on my friend!
Above average bids may get additional upvotes from our trail members!
Get Upvotes, Join Our Trail, or Delegate Some SP
Highly rEsteemed.
SteemIt is Economic Warfare in Content Attention Land.
It is kind of frightening, how well you wrote this. And how well thought out it is.. You are practically handing the recipe for chaos over to those evil looking to do just this..
Although I do believe that love would triumph over hate.
An excellent read. I certainly will do all in my power to prevent evil from spreading here on this platform and manipulate it for their desire.
Actually, I did not design this at all but instead I evaluated what I have witnessed unfolding and did some research. I merely explained what one individual is doing. It has already been done and we are witnessing the middle game right now.
Love will prevail and it is important that we not surrender to their game, but walk our own path and not participate with their attempts to disrupt our prosperity, giving and sharing.
I shared my thoughts to bring awareness so that we don't fall for it. I also pray that it convinces some of my friends to return to the pay it forward approach to life and build strength within this community.
May Creator bless you.
Crazy, because for a moment whilst reading this yesterday, I did have a thought for a moment that it was in regards to someone on this platform..
It seemed to match a certain scenario but I will not poke or prod any more as to not give anything away I guess.
Thank you for your blessing, White Walking Feather,
May Creator also bless you.
It is in regards to somebody on this platform. I gave a hint at who it was with this line:
Thank you for the blessing!
NICEONE Bucky!
Well played Mr Bankster!
It seems to be spreading as well to another not for profit community who has maybe been doing a bit too well for some people's comfort. Familyprotection are now under attack too.
It's a saddening affair and I recently posted a viewpoint that I feel many may be missing in the affray. If I might respectfully direct you towards it if you have the time to read it: https://steemit.com/peace/@minismallholding/can-we-live-and-let-live
While I cannot prove that the user is a bankster, he / she is sure acting like one. I'm not familiar with the @familyprotection issues that they are having. Can you give me a brief update?
We're very easily played, so it wouldn't surprise me.
There seem to have been two bots set up to flag the familyprotection comment which notifies of resteems. Because the account doesn't post very often this is the main one used for people wanting to donate via upvotes and now it's basically being censored. In the comments on this post there is a bit of a 'discussion' on it. https://steemit.com/familyprotection/@kryptocoin/illumination-the-quest-of-a-cleaner-or-or-or-who-i-am
Love what u did here! Just remember to shower and wash up after being in the mind of a banker while writing this👍
I know right! yuke. I feel like I just finished swimming in their sewage lagoon. Gives my green pastures a whole new perspective and appreciation!
Another way, that I think will happen:
get some developers and pay them to create crypto coin that way we banksters want: unlimited printing by us, with total transparency: who does what and where and how...
when finished and tested and ready to deploy, put it into operation and tell your minnows (most important governments and politicians around the world) that they need to forbid by law any other currency but this, our, real one. Crime if caught must be punishable 2 times, 3 times more than say for getting caught with hard drugs. Only one crypto currency is allowed from now on.
An interesting angle @wwf and I commend you for, want of a better phrase, sticking to your guns and keeping them in the holsters.
My only qualm is the use of the word 'violence' in relation to flags - i'm taking a slight assumption here that this is what you mean and so I won't over-do my words..
A flag is given, at the click of the mouse (not a real mouse), for a couple of reasons, and one of these reasons is a 'Disagreement on rewards'. I like to think that all disagreements don't end in violence, no matter how many disagreements take place.
I understand your feelings towards what is happening at present, and am grateful to have your insight and views.
Thank you.
Thank you for taking such a mature approach to discussing these topics. I respect that greatly. Let us work through the idea of 'disagreement on rewards' and the term 'violence' to see if we can work it through.
My argument in my post suggests that injury has been done, emotionally and financially. Not only to the individual receiving the rewards but to those who gifted the rewards through their upvote.
By removing the rewards we silence those who expressed themselves through the upvote. It would be like me digging into the ballot box during an election because I disagreed with the people who were voting.
But if we want to resort to a purely intellectual and legalistic argument, people are well within their 'right' to down vote.
For me, this is not a legalistic issue, but rather an issue of what is right and wrong. To take away something from another, which results in emotional trauma is violent. The problem with legalistic approaches is that violence is a means to an end and is often justified.
From a spiritual point of view, it demands that we not engage in violence, whether it is legally justified or not. That is the premise from which I speak. That harm can be done with the simple click of a mouse, check mark in a box when we vote or even behind the symbolism of a dollar bill when we go to the store to buy some candy.
That is where I am coming from. Do you care to share your thoughts on it? You mentioned you had a problem with the word 'violence' but you did not really explain why.
downvote is taking away gifts given by others. That is stealing, no matter how justified it may be. Stealing is violent.
Hi again
Thank you for explaining your views again and in depth.
I suppose my 'problem' can be explained by my understanding of the quote you gave:
'Physical Force', is what my understanding of the word violence is. While the clicking of the flag button could be done with plenty more force than is required for the computer to understand the requested action, I just think the word here seems out of place.
When I vote in a ballot, and take the opposite side to my friend, I don't wish any harm or negative force towards them - I'm just choosing what I see is right at that point. And, I would hope that if we shared our vote (and disagreement on where it should have been placed), that violence would not come to mind or be an action.
I suppose a second point could be raised from the quote and that is the damage to property. Until the post is 'paid out', one could say that the pending reward is not theirs, and still part of the rewards pool that everyone shares?
There are many different definitions of 'force'. the one you speak of is in regards to physical strength and when you do that you can only see as far as the mouse sitting beside your computer.
However, force also means 'power to influence, affect or control' and when you use that definition, suddenly the influence moves far beyond the mouse and can then spread to any corner of the world. It spreads that far because we built tools to extend our influence to anywhere.
We have great influence over people and we must be forever vigilant to ensure that our influence does not result in harm. When somebody upvotes they are exercising their influence. It is called curating. When we flag somebody to take away that vote, we wiped out somebody else influence AND having a significant negative emotional impact on the one receiving the rewards. That is harmful and violent.
Your scenario regarding when the transfer of 'property' occurs is the exact question that I talk about in my post. From a legalistic point of view, one could argue that the transfer of title for the property does not occur until it is paid out and is transferred into the individuals wallet. However from an emotional and spiritual point of view, the individual has made a connection with those rewards the moment they were gifted. A spiritual being who has the capacity to empathize with others must take this emotional attachment into consideration when making decisions. That same individual would most likely NOT do the down vote because it would cause emotional harm to the individual and also would cause financial harm too! That same individual would also recognize that by doing the down vote would also muzzle the free speech of others and that is a very dangerous precedent to set. In order to maintain freedom we must allow others to say what they want without taking any actions to shut them up. The moment we do that, we are all harmed.
This issue is about freedom! If you fast forward to when he speaks about the two communists crashing their rally, you may find more support for what I speak about.
Down voting is part of the system actually and an important aspect of it. You may not like it or disagree but it is what it is. Also, flagging is not censorship. If you accept the upvotes then you must accept the flags as well. Rewards are not due to anyone until the 7 day window has passed as you are well aware.
To claim that flagging is not censorship is a significant claim. Care to explain how flagging for spam or if rewards are unfair does not fit into the definition of censorship?
By flagging somebody are you not expressing your own moral code and punishing them for not meeting that code or punishing the curators for not fitting in with that code?
Your position, while it attempts to support the flagging, does not convince me.
May I also remind you that just because it is part of the system does not make it morally or ethically correct. Violence and coercion has been a part of systems for thousands of years, made legal in fact. But it does not make it ethically correct.
When I stand on the principle of 'love thy neighbour as thy self', I must conclude that flagging is not love at all. It is theft and violent. I refuse to participate with that.
If you found a way to justify it and engage in flagging, then that is your journey and path. I refuse to follow you down that path.
I love the words you use: Punishment, violence, coercion, morals, theft, moral code.
LMAO: You seem to be slightly extreme for a social media platform. No I’m not going to get into a debate surrounding flags but I can say they aren’t going anywhere as they are vital in expressing opinion. If you don’t agree, then maybe this isn’t the place for you. Plenty of platforms where you don’t earn anything so the upvotes/downvotes there wouldn’t be theft.
Your response is to minimize what I am saying, mock me by laughing at me and pointing me to the door.
Do you see the covert violence you just engaged in? You call me extreme? I have zero tolerance for that kind of behaviour. This conversation is done and you are now muted.
oh yes, this rings perfectly true! I have seen this happen a few imes already in my short 8 months on Steemit! hmmmm let's hope people start to wise up and ignore the devils advocates
Not likely but we can work hard to influence people regarding the alternative ways of behaving. <3 Walk the path and lead by example.
How would this play out if individuals were not able to increase in power? If one's vote was always just a vote.
The weighted vote easily can be used for good as in your previous post mentioned whales sharing there wealth and influence. But it is easily exploited when whales only hangout with other whales as mentioned above.
Human for sure are a flaw in this system, but the initial design of the blockchain has one as well. That flaw is weighted voting.
You haven't had a debate for a couple of weeks, maybe that could be a topic of discussion. How can Steem be distributed to prevent abuse, real or imagined?
You are proposing changes to the system to counter act the flaw of people. It is not possible. Before long you will have a governance system bloated like the empires we see in the world today. We must resist the temptation to control and manipulate people and just life our lives through self-governance, peace, freedom, patience and self-sufficiency. If we tried to build a system we would need to engage in coercion and force in order to ensure people followed our system. You will find me leaving if it came to that!
What I am proposing is actually simplifying the system. One vote being one vote, no formulas behind it.
Have you done the math behind it? Do you think it will solve the problem? If so, how? Perhaps pitch the idea to the witnesses. You will have to convince them of the change. But that one simple change will impact the whole system. I doubt very much you would get a consensus on that change.
There is nothing wrong with the system. People are the problem. Always will be too. So how do we fix that problem?
Of course I have not done the math behind it! :-) Not vested enough to take the time. I see it solving the problem in the above scenario as the bankster would not be able to feed the greed as his vote would be the same as everyone else.
I will continue say the system could be better but because of the difficulties in changing it will leave it alone for now. I agree that consensus would be extremely difficult as many steemians are invested in building there accounts on the increasing power and weighted voting. The impact would be huge.
Totally agree people will always be the main problem and that is best dealt with being a good influence. Walking and talking the walk and talk.
Very wise article. I happily did resteem. I really liked it. Good luck to you.
Thank you. <3 I'm glad you liked it. I did not actually want to write it, but my wife insisted.