Raising fundamental questions of decentralization

It is going to take some time for the dust to settle on this last fork, albeit a softfork. This may very well be a defining moment of the history of the Steem blockchain, However, I believe that the community may come through it stronger than before as it raises a lot of fundamental questions about not only the operation of Steem, but of the value proposition of blockchain in general.

I think that at least one commonly held illusion has been addressed in last night's fork, and that is the one of censorship. Many people have mistakenly believed that Steem is censorship proof, when it has never been, it has been censorship resistant. The witnesses proved that last night by effectively targeting the stake of a single account, the ex-Steemit Inc stake, that now belongs to Justin Sun of Tron.

When it comes to the Steem community, I have a pretty good sense of things, however the complexity of the governance is something that is hard to read, as is their outcomes of decisions made. When it comes to getting a sense of what is going on in this area, I tend to lean on those whose opinion I respect and last night I asked a question that got answered by two of these people:

Do you personally feel more secure in Steem and the value of your stake with the latest code change?

 

I do. The huge Steemit stake was long ago promised to support onboarding and development of the Steem blockchain and I think only this promise allowed the blockchain to get established, given the huge percentage obtained by Steemit initially. source
@blocktrades

I haven't felt very secure about the value of my stake for some time, even less so after the sale of Steemit, but this code change gives me at least some reason for cautious optimism. We'll see how it plays out. source
@smooth

There was more answered by each which you can find under the source link. However and as I said on my own replies, these are two people who I have found to be consistent in their views and generally approach everything that has happened on Steem with an even-handed approach. Not only that, both of them hold significant stake still but do not seem to need to rely on it, and both of them are among the few original Steem miners back at the inception of the blockchain in 2016. I think this gives them a perspective worth listening to.

Again, these are only the opinions of two people and they make it quite clear that it is their opinion and should be treated as such, but it is definitely worth having a read of the entire post and thread.

In my opinion, while there is the sense that we are all experts on all things since we have the internet at our disposal, the fact is we are not and often, we seek out information to support our world view, not the reality. I am personally still agnostic on whether this is a positive or negative for Steem in the short or long term, but as I think I have said, the softfork is somewhat of a neutral territory that freezes the state of the mined stake until more information is known.

Is it censorship? No, Justin Sun can speak freely on all the matters, but it does create an awkward position for everyone concerned, and that is all of us. Yet, spending time thinking about what it actually means to be a participant in a decentralized ecosystem requires exploring just what that is.

Like it or not, the vast majority of us on this blockchain and in the world have very little experience in matters of this kind of government and are learning by doing. On top of this, we are also carrying a lot of baggage from our individual experience that we might over-weigh and feel that it is relevant, even if it is not.

Near all of us have been raised under some level of centralized authority and have proxied much of our decision making to others who we hope are more qualified than us and have our best interests at heart. We do a similar thing here on Steem with a core difference, this is an opt-in ecosystem, none of us were born into it and none of us carry the blockchain "code of conduct" naturally.

However, we are human. We get used to things being a certain way even if it is an illusion, and then feel fear and anger when our ways are challenged. Censorship resistance is still in place, censorship proof never was. I believe that it is much better to address this early on in the development of Steem than later when it affects many more today. This is the same view I have with exploring the economics and social dynamics.

I urge anyone who actually cares about the philosophy behind Steem to at least read some of the posts moving around and take an objective view, rather than picking a side with what is comfortable. On the same thread,

I admit, my first response on hearing this was a negative one toward the witnesses that must be supporting it but in the light of the comments on this thread particularly,I have changed my mind. source
@meesterboom

This is being open to the influence of others and listening rather than talking. I am not saying that the positions are correct, but at least they are considered and measured. And, there are also two points I will extract more from the comments section.

Also, as a purely philosophical matter, making promises then not keeping them, just ticks me off. source
@blocktrades

Well, code is law on a particular fork because, after all, the computer will always do exactly what the code says, no more and no less. But as you say you are free to leave it and join another one. source
@smooth

The first quote shows the human side of the philosophical argument, people have standards and some will stick to them even if there will be a cost. The second speaks to the law of the code and highlights that this like much of life is an opt-in community.

If you believe being here goes against your personal philosophy, you are welcome to opt-out, just as those who believe that Steem adds value to their personal experience, have opted in.

The one thing that we should all carry with us from our experiences is, no matter what kind it was, the laws of humans always change as they are all imperfect. I value my participation here as it gives me a role in directing the change, hopefully towards a better future with less suffering for all. No matter how anyone looks at anything goes on here, ultimately, the final responsibility of decisions is up to us as individuals.

While this latest change in code might cause some to opt-out, it could also be a turning point for more to opt-in.

These views are my own.

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]