You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The last missing piece of the steem puzzle
It is an interesting proposal. I am unsure on some of the implementation details though. For example, how do you define consensus? What would stop someone from Sybil attacking and just creating a whole bunch of accounts, so they could be a 'majority'. Keep in mind, reputation and account age are not going to be valid ways to ensure 'one vote per user'. Also, how do you deal with the fact that a majority of users will not want to be involved in the moderation/downvoting process. I'm interested to hear more. Right now I'm just having a hard time imagining how it will work.
From @azfix
Seems like a good idea, what's your take on it?
@snowflake - this downvoting issue is only going to become more economically violent on Zappl, as they've told me they'll also have the flagging feature. Can you imagine the furore over a 210 character tweet (or Zap! as they are called) that takes over $300++?? OUCH!!
'Me too!' - 6 chars, $60. Think you are still winning buddy!
. =$10 - Nice! ... (awaits @ausbitbank flag! LOL!)
ahh you have a flagger. 😐 Don't worry, I'll gladly become the new filter!
P.S. You might be interested in today's Daily Dose :) https://steemit.com/steemit/@mindhunter/the-steemit-daily-dose-the-steemit-daily-dose-has-been-cancelled-indefinitely-due-to-whale-flagging-a-collectivist-communist
on my way now!
No, they are not flaggers. They are censorship basement dwelling manginas - the worst variant of social justice warriors. @craig-grant has already fled the exits because of them (love or hate him!) I feel many will follow suit until the flagging issue is addressed ... until then we live under a collectivist Communist system of control with economic violence as its main weapon.
Indeed.
I'm still of the opinion you can say what you like, just don't expect it all to be of (financial) worth!
How about a tab for the review of upvoted, two-worded comments greater than $50? 😘
Respect to you and MH for this one!
I'm not really opposed to something like that if it were done right, but it would be very difficult to implement in a way that wasn't prone to abuse.
Hi there @snowflake
Went back in your comments a few days, where things usually settle down and not much happens a day or 3 back etc...
Just wanted to say thanks for the vote tonite, and did not want to seem spammy about it LOL.
I appreciate it a lot.
Have a good day. Or nite.
I am not sure where you are actually LOL.
Since VP is weighted by SP, all that is required to successfully mount a Sybil attack on Steemit is money, not multiple accounts. In fact, there are those that state that the current monopolization of the rewards pool by a handful of accounts is exactly that: a Sybil attack.
It's hard to remain unconvinced of that, and perhaps only my ignorance of the minutiae of witness voting enables me to continue to hope that Steemit yet might become decentralized. Less than 50 accounts hold the vast majority of SP, however, and the numbers indicate my hopes are but fantasy.
You are quite right about defining consensus. It takes upwards of 10,000 minnow votes to equal one whale vote. This imbalance is enabling botnet raids on the rewards pool, since there aren't enough whales to crush the bots, and minnows have too little VP to do it in groups of reasonable and attainable size.
However, weighting VP with reputation, and precluding means of gaming reputation, would make those bots quite fragile compared to groups, even of new accounts, while also precluding the SEC from acting to regulate Steem as a security.
I recommend doing that. You, I know from previous discussions, disagree, and you're the witness. The price of Steem is not rising commensurate with BCC, for example, despite the use case of Steemit, and I believe it is because of the SP/VP issue.
We'll see, as developments continue, how things shake out.
This is discussed at great length in the whitepaper. It is basically the design behind Steem. Sure, you can design an entirely new system, or re-design this one, but it is hard to pick apart this one when it is the main premise that the system was founded upon.
Sounds like an interesting idea. I'm not really opposed to exploring it. To actually design/build this though is probably quite complex. You may be underestimating the difficulty of the problem.
It has stayed relatively stable compared to the USD. We are kind of in 'wait' mode right now with regards to the major items in the Roadmap, and some of the other changes that have been discussed. I don't know if expecting to gain a whole lot of value in the short-term is really the right expectation. It would be nice, but for now, not crashing (as we wait for the things that are needed to take the platform mainstream) is good enough for me.
It is certainly one of them. Others, such as rewards for content creation, and curation, are perhaps more integral to Steemit than VP weighting, in terms of design.
Whether Steemit amends the code weighting VP, again, as it did with HF19, or not, there are other platforms being created that are making changes in how VP is weighted, and taking reputation into account to do it.
You may appreciate that it is not I writing the code =p.
While my investment in Steem is limited to rewards, and I do not intend to spend them for the foreseeable future, I do care about the price, as it drives interest in Steemit, about which I do care a great deal.
I, too, will be happy if the price of Steem doesn't crash, as it will mean that Steemit doesn't. However, I am sure that all of us would be also quite happy to see the price perform as BCC has recently. I am unaware of any advantages BCC has over Steem as a currency, particularly given the potential of a social media platform to drive use of the currency, which BCC doesn't have.
Steem has advantages in transaction speed, lack of fees, and the social media platform driving it's adoption, over other cryptos, and it seems likely to me that the markets are cognizant of those benefits, and also it's flaws.
If we learn anything from the BTC fork, it is that a good forking resulting in twin currencies can be very good for the parent currency. Perhaps Steem might take advantage of this lesson, and spawn.
Exactly what I came here to say, what do you mean by consensus? I would rather have flagging be based on steempower than a pure number of downvotes. At least with the steempower you are putting the power into the hands of people who invested in Steemit and have some skin in the game. In theory those people should have some motivation to act in the best interest of the platform because its their money on the line if things tank.
I would rather have those people deciding than say noganoo and his bot army being able to decide what posts should be hidden.
That's why @snowflake believes that reputation should be used. You can have 1000 accounts but the reputation is only 25. You need to work hard to get a higher reputation. Would it be better if bernie decides what posts should be hidden?!
Except he doesn't say how reputation would be used, just a vague "consensus"...
Reputation is gameable. I believe that one 100% upvote from a user like blocktrades can take a brand new user from reputation 25 to 55+.
If reputation can not fullfil its purpose then we have a problem.
I believe reputation on steem needs to be redefined entirely.
It was really designed with a specific purpose in mind - as a tool to combat spam. If it was going to be used for something like you are proposing, you are correct - it would need to be redesigned. A redesign of the reputation system is a pretty large task in of itself. Not necessarily a bad idea, but it would be a lot of work.
How does it combat spam?
By hiding content from users with a negative rep. It isn't perfect at what it does, but it does do a decent job at preventing/discouraging/hiding some of the low level abuse.