How is the change to 13-week withdrawal implemented? I.E., will the first power-down payments immediately after the hard fork be 8x larger? Or will we need to re-schedule our power-downs after the hard fork to take advantage of the increased withdrawal rate?
The change to 13 week power down will make Steem even more concentrated amongst whales, making it entirely non-viable going forward.
The drop in the inflation rate by charging it to everyone, is great, but the consumerate drop to 13 weeks is simply a power grab.
So when are you going to build your Steem-killing competitor to take advantage of these new devastating weaknesses?
Bitcointalk is full of foul-mouthed goobers and disgruntled attackers. A few days spent reading posts there was enough for me.
bitcointalk reminds me of my grandma watching soap operas all day
A most excellent comparison @craig-grant! Ooops! Granny has just pee'd herself again! GRRRRR!
I assume you would not throw out your baby with the bath water? If you don't understand those technical points, then maybe that will indicate to you that perhaps you don't understand the importance of Bitcointalk. I've been banned from Bitcointalk once or twice already, so it is not as if I am in love with the concept of a centralized, top-down controlled forum.
I see you live in Surigao. I've been there many times.
I read you have invested more than $700 in Steem recently. I hope that is a not a large amount of your savings. I hope you understand the risk of speculating on altcoins. Given you resteemed this blog, I presume you are speculating based on advice similar to that. Well I also commented recently that an early collapse is normal for a technology adoption investment curve, but that doesn't mean that every such collapse is indicative of a technology adoption curve. Many others simply die.
The point is that there can't be objective information in a circle-jerk echo chamber like Steem where everyone says what everyone wants to hear/read. Rancor is a necessary part of diversified information. Even academics have heated arguments. Have you see Freeman Dyson total dismantle the pompous Richard Dawkins (author the Selfish Gene)?
For you to learn about crypto-currencies objectively, you can't do that only from Steem. The news sites also tend to lag behind the level of deep inspection that you get from someone like myself at Bitcointalk 1 - 2 years in advance.
I'm doing fine without Bitcointalk, and I'll continue to be fine without it, thank you. $700 is a drop in the bucket for me. I've been in online marketing for 12 years, live in a two-story house, and want for nothing. $700 was what I had in Bitcoin, plus I tossed another $110 in here from another wallet. I'm new to Crypto as of this year. It's been an interesting journey so far. :) No babies.
Point taken. I'll check out some of your posts over there. Thanks! :)
Out of respect for what Steem has done for me personally and also for the crypto/blockchain ecosystem in general by leading the way, I prefer not to discuss that on Steem(it). Bitcoin is really the main target. We are all competing trying to provide the ecosystem that we can all rally around and go create 100s of our own profitable projects within such an ecosystem. The billions in the world are the goal, not destroying each other. I'm competitive person, but this really isn't like a sport. It is more about building a way for inclusion instead of exclusion.
When you initiate a power down it is encoded on the blockchain as a rate of VESTS/week (equal to 1/104 of your VESTS balance at the time you initiate the power down). Each week that fixed number of VESTS is converted to STEEM at the current exchange rate and added to your account balance. That rate of VESTS/week will not change for existing power downs. New power downs will use a rate 8x higher.
So we won't start seeing increased liquid supply until 1 week after the hard fork.
I believe that is correct. It is certainly correct with regard to power down requests. I'm only qualifying it because there are other changes in the hard fork and without thinking about it more carefully i can't be 100% none of them affect liquid supply in some non-obvious way.
Off the top of my head I think liquid supply will actually decrease during the first week after the hard fork, because posting rewards will be smaller. There may be other effects though.
EDIT: One way it might not be true is that buyers or others who receive STEEM might be less inclined to power it up quickly (since the difference between liquid STEEM inflation and SP effective inflation is vastly lower). So supply that becomes liquid for whatever reason might be more likely to stay liquid, even during that first week.
Yeah, all of that makes sense.
If 90% of STEEM interest is going to rewards instead of approx 6% to rewards.. wouldn't they payouts go up?
No because the total amount of interest is decreasing dramatically. After factoring in the drop in total interest/inflation as well as the increased share going to rewards, the net result is approximately a 40% drop in rewards. That assumes an unchanged STEEM price, which in reality could be higher or lower.
Ouch.
I have repeatedly and consistently urged doing this with a transition curve, economically equivalent to what was already happening with a fixed size reward pool coupled with high inflation. Rewards (both content and witness rewards) would be unchanged immediately when the fork occurs, but would drop to the eventual target over 1-2 years. This would avoid a huge, and I argue unnecessary, disruption of payout to authors as well as the disruption of witness-funded projects, while still ending up with the same long-run inflation of <10% within a year or two (and then declining eventually to <1%). The team and at least some community members have never bought into this idea however, and seem set on some sort of pitchfork-driven "Cut Rewards Now!" push.