You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Pick of Daily Most Interesting & Most Underrated Posts From Ordinary Steemit Users - No Whales Inlcuded (Art, Science, Philosophy, Psychology)
Thanks for sharing and caring!
Thanks for sharing and caring!
I hope they will get upvotes. I deeply dislike the current status quo of consolidation of power between "whale fellowship of mutual admiration" who just multiply their profits through greed, every single today and become more powerful.
I hope steem doesn't turn into an unrealized dream for many. I think it's a great experiment so far, but most accounts don't have any impact as curators and when it makes too many people feel useless, I'm afraid this place could get empty as a desert..
Yes, you are very right. I mentioned that before. New users who can't afford buying truck loads of Steem Power tend to get disillusioned within 2-3 weeks...
https://steemit.com/steemit/@logic/steemit-as-direct-projection-of-delusion-of-american-dream
(I replied it here, as I can't reply on your last comment)
Yes I'm afraid for some tipping point where we end up like a digital version of this. The great thing about steem is it transparency, but it could also be its downfall if people keep seeing the same names in the front row. But at the moment I feel there is a lot of creativity and many community members are here just to have a great time. I hope that will remain the primary reasons for most!
Great article/study/link you posted.
I have been talking about it for long time, debating with people. The whole class violence/social stratification is even rooted in the way we design our technology such as transport. There is always special "first class" section for privileged. Inequality is the core design of social system.
Thank you! If you are into mathematics / economics, this is a very interesting paper. The paper is rooted in math, though there are no equations. It's one of those papers that I reread every once in a while. Certainly a magnificent piece of work. The main idea of the paper is to show that under very simple, and reasonable, assumptions, already in a very simple setting, inequality in earnings automatically arises purely due to the nature of market mechanisms and the distribution of skills. The paper is old, but it contrasts the belief that is still held by many, that inequality in earnings is due to historical events that have occurred by mere chance.