You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: ANNOUNCEMENT: I'm fed up of dealing with the badly programmed steemd, I'm out
The main objective is to build a system with no single point of failure. Centralisation in Steem is the essence of its failure, in the reward curve, in the closed management and development, and the software licence.
Back in March last year, just before Steem was launched, Dan said that a fully open development process would lead to clones. But nobody in their right mind would want to inherit Dan's shitty codebase anyway ;p
Haha, you'd be surprised.
Let me tell you, I would have cloned it if it was truly open source, and by the time I even found Steem in December there would have been several already. In terms of the social network and that, it would have been fine, I'm sure they would have been even shittier. But in terms of the coin value, I think Steem would have been looking more like Doge.
What do you think? Bitter as the pill is, is there not some point to that?
I disagree. I think very few competent teams would have been able to deal with, or would have chosen to work with a C++ codebase. Ultimately it would have been better for the community anyway, because then we could have chosen a better management team. As it stands, if Steemit, Inc. fuck up, users are all orphaned. At least multiple clones could easily transfer accounts and have a smoother transition process. It would also amount to 'voting with your feet', since the arrangement as it stands depends on witnesses who have a different set of interests than the general userbase.
Dan set it up this way because he didn't want anyone else to take his userbase away from him. So instead, he, and the people he collaborated with, are going to be abandoned, slowly but surely. I personally think unless there is a radical change in management practices, Steem is going to be abandoned.
Perhaps, we'll never know. Sounds like shaky reasoning to me though. I think you underestimate the competency and willingness of the competition.
Yes it's true it was designed for a monopoly. So was Bitcoin, but by virtue of it's actual design, not by license.
I don't know if I agree with Steemit Inc. approach. It's true what you and others have said before, that they're operating on an established (I won't say old) business and company model where the best scenario is a high sale value to some bigger fish.
Maybe it will be abandoned. It certainly is more likely with all this shade.