RE: “Consortium blockchains” (e.g. DPoS & Tendermint) can’t Internet scale
I like how the Internet grew. And I love Bit Torrent, peer to peer. Now, Steem has a rewards pool that is divided out maybe fairly or maybe unfairly out to people like us but also mostly out to the biggest whales like you say.
But what would the alternatives be to reward pools that worked that way? Yes, we can debate about options to fix all this. And maybe the whales are too big. Maybe Steem should have started with everybody at zero money in it when Steem started.
One alternative to a rewards pool would be to have no collective pool and just let people Bit Torrent wire money or cryptocurrencies to people we want to upvote on Steemit. In the real world, some people have most of the dollars in the world. In the crypto world, the same thing is happening. We may not like that some people are very rich in the world, but what can we do compete with that or to stop that or what should we do? Facebook is making billions of dollars off us humans each year. At least we can make some money on Steemit in contrast with what Facebook has been doing. Facebook is a very big whale. Steemit may be bad like you say but Facebook is worse, right?
Please see my reply to @amirl.
The solution I have in mind doesn’t require that tokens be uniformly distributed. Fungible resources will always be power-law distributed in nature.
Change Tip Must Die explains why tipping doesn’t work.
So I’ve told you what doesn’t work, but I haven’t yet told you what I think will work.
That Changetip article was written by a fucking moron, aka Emin.
"First of all, every time I strike up a random conversation with a stranger, I discover that they have already heard about Bitcoin."
Yep, totally accurate representation of 2014. Maybe if you live in an echo chamber.
"perpetrating a prosecution complex, fearmongering about an inflationary collapse that refuses to happen"
Doesn't know what prosecution means: check.
Is a mainstream propaganda mouthpiece for unsustainable debt: check.
This really makes all other arguments by this douchenozzle impossible to take seriously.
Cherry picking a few sentences that you want to quibble with in no way negatives the validity of the argument about why tipping doesn’t work on the Internet. He also links off to some research and writing on the issue by others. The issue is basically cognitive load and economies-of-scale. Something like Patreon makes more sense because people can commit to an automated monthly stipend for the work someone appreciates.
I do have one criticism of their theory which users also don’t want to have to manage dozens or 100s of different subscriptions.
So tipping doesn’t work, subscriptions don’t scale, and Steem’s “proof-of-brain” voting is a game theory clusterfuck, so thus I devised a different paradigm to be announced soon.