RE: The recent controversy between Steemit Inc and the community - the premine, control, and where it leads this blockchain
First of all, this is theft.
All the ad-hominem/political attacks on @ned and STINC do not make theft justifiable.
Secondly, this goes against one of the core principles of the blockchain - its most appealing value proposition - which is that your tokens cannot be taken away by anyone.
Principles aside, I think the forked version of Steem would not bode well.
1.) Most people are just "talkers" and not doers. They are complaining about problems, but will fail to materialize solutions.
2.) Decentralized "governance" has (to my knowledge) 0 historic proof of being effective.
3.) I seriously doubt that "the people" would magically pony up the resources to move Steem and its ecosystem forward. Without economic or other incentives, such behavior is irrational. Like it or not, STINC is the entity with most economic motivation to innovate/invest in Steem.
We have some friendly whales in the community, however making an assumption that they would gracefully and competently carry the project is risky.
Thus, my speculation is that if STINC were forcibly removed, Steem would most likely stagnate, have increased politics (bullshit) and die in an ETC-like fashion.
yup, it is theft...also, decentralized governance sucks ass (check bitshares).
So just because some version sucked ass it means it couldn't be improved on and made work right? That attitude would kill innovation instantly.
Good point. Agree on both examples.
It's as much theft as what's been done with the PreMine over the years... I say FORK'em and let the currencies that come after compete. I'll accept just about anything that get's rid of the actual problems of STEEM... Forking appears to be the only real way to get rid of him.
I'd like him to got to jail... but I'm an anarchist so whatever.
I'm shocked to hear that from you to be honest, unless you're just missing the context of this entire discussion.
So any selective snapshot, which does not include a specific actor, is "theft" in your opinion? Was it theft when Golos forked and assumed control of the premine?
(I'm pretty sure that happened, but was so long ago and that chain has all but failed at this point. It's hard to find info on it anymore. Either way this additional note is just to state that I'm not sure what the history was at that time.)
Yes, its theft, because it removes stake from 1 party, and the reduction of supply increases the value of remaining stake for everyone else. Practically this means that someone benefits from other persons forced loss.
With Golos its different, since they went on to create a new chain.
I think if someone forks-off Steem (hey, the code is open-source), removes people they don't like and airdrops to everyone else, its totally fine.
Any fork is always "a new chain". An existing unforked chain would continue with the existing consensus rules.
There may be one or two (or less likely, but possible in the case of a severe botch) no viable chains after a fork, depending on the actions of independent individuals in the ecosystem (users). By now in cryptocurrency we have seen every manner of forks which have intentionally or unintentionally resulted in new chains, and many which have not (but which could have).
In many cases a fork may be viewed as an upgrade in which essentially everyone participates and that is their choice, resulting in only one chain. But again, this is a matter of the choices people make and that is all.
There is no "reduction of supply" resulting from any fork, because even if the fork did do that, the larger supply still exists on the other fork if people choose to continue to use it. Arguably forks always create new supply, not reduce, and some have even made the case they are inherently "inflationary", which in some sense is strictly true but the economic reality is a bit more subtle (and off topic here).
In Steem people don't really have a choice - rather, the decision is made by the witnesses.
Theoretically perhaps, but unlikely in practice. In any case, a chain that is not recognized by the ticker symbol STEEM would have almost no value.
People always have a choice what code to run. If you don't like how things are working with the witnesses you can change the entire block production model if you want, and/or if existing witnesses don't participate in such a chain, the chain can limp along via backup witnesses until witnesses can be replaced.
What chains will continue and what price they will have is always speculation. Perhaps informed speculation, but still speculation. I don't agree with you that anything not with the magic S-T-E-E-M imprint on it would somehow become worthless, were it otherwise of value.
Moreover it isn't even a predetermined matter what symbol applies to which fork. If the Ethereum community (miners, users, exchanges, etc.) had ended up not supporting the anti-DAO hacker fork as they did, what is now called ETC would have ended up now being called ETH, and Vitalik said he was open to that possibility at the time.
Those clarifications were very much needed. I'm not sure why they were not more predominantly specified in any of the discussions.
I held those statements as correct.
There was never support to do this on the live chain, though it was discussed (as it should be to explore the consequences). I'd also argue that in the greater discussions, a new chain was actually discussed far more than doing this on the live chain.
Everyone who even mentioned the slightest support for the idea of a "Steem without Steemit Inc" never actually said "on the live blockchain".
The context here is incredibly important.
Thanks for clarifying. My points do not apply to new chains.
It's not because people would invest more time and energy on the steemit free chain that it's by any mean theft.
The forked chain might die, if they're worried about that it could mean they've contributed less than what what they've stalled.
BTW I have made zero commitments to that other hypothetical chain yet. Like almost everyone.
My understanding is predicated on the assumption that the fork being discussed here is applied to Steem chain itself. This is a contentious modification as it violates the core promise of blockchain systems.
If the intent is to create a new Steem-like chain that is not Steem, but based on Steem's codebase and modified state, well, I have no objections to that, and I wish the new project/chain best of luck.
And yes, I don't have the full context. I've been removed from "secret slack" a while ago...most likely due to inactivity.
Well man... this phrase resumes everything as always in here.
It doesn't even matter what we are talking about inside the chain... seems like a soAp opera and to be true the problem must not be so difficult to resolve.
We have many smart people... just can't understand why we keeps with that!
Peace V!
hmm Soup :)
hahaha good catch!
I wasn't sure if it was on purpose or not ;) I kind of liked a soup opera, was envisioning all kinds of soups with different roles, the happy tomato one, the sad broccoli and the easy going aubergine one..
Hahahah.... true!
Now we only have to figure out which one Ned is?
Hope we can be aware of the chance he is losing! So smart guy to ruin everything..let's see! Chances like this one you only have one in a lifetime...
Believe me that is Elon Musk fucked a car ten years ago in an explosion he could not make what Tesla is nowadays ;)
People remember, and always the bad moves.
If they forked out @steemit, I am pretty sure @steemit and @ned could create another fork, with @steemit's stake included.
It would break up the community and is NOT in the interest of Steemians @jesta. Witnesses appear to be overreaching their boundaries, and may be doing more harm than good.
You can't "fork out steemit". You can only create a new chain with new parameters and campaign for people to participate (i.e Golos). If people still run the software put out by Steemit Inc and visit steemit.com it'd be like nothing happened.
I don't think you are aware of the conversations witnesses had about nulling Steemit's passwords with a hardfork @riverhead.
It was discussed and the actual code was even posted on Github. That is what lead to @steemit Powering Down almost all of their stake.
Hello, with my qualities posts and content not getting enough visibility,
I would like to plead in any way whether you can help me out by delegating some amount of steem power to me for me to grow my account and curate more. I will be happy for your helping hand been rendered to me and i promise to make careful use of it and use it also to impact and grow others on steemit.
Thanks.
What's your position on EIP in HF21?
Agree 100% - Was there consensus for these proposals we see today?
Shame, Shame, Shame!!!
These weren't proposals... these were talking about "what if" and "how". No one actually proposed anything, the conversations never got far enough before Ned went on the offensive.
Somewhere in a hidden dark room on the interwebs we talk about "what if" and "how" and we don't tell others about it, its called a conspiracy ... consensus on opinion is all about dpos, when there is no consensus, it's should be dropped, done, move on, next....
I really don't have the patience to argue with you, but I'd recommend you ask questions and learn more before you start applying labels like "conspiracy" to this situation.
I'd recommend you focus on eos...
It'd probably be better for my sanity, that's for sure. The literal definition of insanity happens within the hidden dark rooms you talk of, not only in slack, but in the Steemit Inc offices.
Wait, who is talking anything about stealing Steemit Inc's assets on the blockchain they are right now? Nothing that currently exists would be destroyed with the fork.
To the rest, you might be right but we'll see. The ninja mined (stolen stake) has always been the anchor holding Steem back. I'm sure people will continue to choose decentralization over centralization.
Agree on everything you said. People are building castles in the sky and when things really start happening, they will have to wake up. ETH vs ETC was a good example. Personally I'd love to see a similar scenario just to sell the free coins and buy into the chain that has not committed "Theft".
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.