You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Hardfork 20: What to Expect Tomorrow

in #steem5 years ago

Thank you for the update on what is the eve of the Hard Fork for me (or close enough). While I do note quite a bit of uncertainty as to how things will look once HF 20 will take effect, I'd rather know that is a possibility than not know at all, so thank you for that.

I have been thinking that RCs in particular would have the earliest most profound effect on users, so I'm glad to have that spelled out. I'm wondering if there's a lower SP threshold below which someone can reasonably anticipate issues? Or is it basically we won't know until it happens? Since we're working towards an equilibrium, and transitioning from the old way to the new way, I guess I'm wondering if that will allow the vast majority of current users, the red fish, to operate as normal, even if gut is all you've got to go off.

From all accounts, I understand RCs to be a necessary transition and something that is more equitable and accurate, so here's wishing us all a good Hard Fork tomorrow. :)


Unfortunately we can't know until it happens. My gut is that if people are used to posting, commenting and voting a lot, they will run into issues slightly sooner at first and if they keep using Steem that way over time they will hit the limits faster and faster as the RC system kicks in. Those who aren't power users probably won't encounter many issues at all. That being said, if people adjust their behavior in anticipation of the changes and are more careful with how much they post and comment, they might not encounter any issues and there may be fewer issues generally. That is the problem, we have no idea how people are going to react to the system, which makes it impossible to predict what will happen. It's a totally decentralized, free market system.

Hey, @andrarchy. Thanks for responding.

What would constitute commenting, posting and commenting a lot? For instance, I'm a participant in @abh12345's engagement league, so we're encouraged to engage. There's some folks who are averaging between 200-500 comments a week (one much more than that), along with 4-12 posts, and somewhere between 100-300 upvotes. Is that considered a lot? Or is that one of the things we'll be finding out?

Most of the folks who do this are minnow-sized or smaller, so they're not high SP accounts. They're doing this, in part, because of the exposure commenting on a larger scale can bring to their own posts, and they're trying to spread their votes as much as they can, too.

Fortunately for some, they receive delegations from Asher which would increase their RCs, but it will be interesting to find out!

Dropping a comment so I can follow the conversation. This sounds like something that could have a huge impact. Makes me very grateful for the sp I have.

Hard for me to follow along even after dropping a comment. It works when I am online at the time, but once off..lost cause.

Hey, @beeyou. NIce to see you, as always. How are things, other than busy, busy, busy? :)

You and andrarchy pretty much answered within seconds of one another so I'm not sure if you saw his reply to the comment you just replied on or not. I'd encourage you to take a look at it if you haven't and tell me what you think once you have.

Thanks for the notice @glenalbrethsen. Oh, life doesn't seem to be slowing down any. I was away on vacation for a couple weeks and just now catching up. Still behind for the most part and I suspect I will always be so. I'm glad to read your wife is doing better. :)

I support the idea behind RC consumption and user behavior. I know engagement is encouraged but it is meaningful commenting that should be encouraged more so than daily conversing. I too am guilty for leaving my share of spammy comments here and there, ask @headchange, but that might be my one or two comments for that day. I probably had my share of daily conversing in my earlier redfish days and hope that I am not being hypocritical of it now. Perhaps my perception changed as I learned more about this platform. It would be interesting to see the results on the league going forward, for sure. Perhaps nothing will change afterall? :)

I believe things will change just a little. I rarely make the top 10 to 20 but when I do it means there has been a lot of chatting going on.
Asher is not the only one who makes contest based on building up comments. Actually just look at the NewbiePalooza as one example.
Also now that I think about it look what happened as an example of why this may be necessary.
I am pretty sure I won't have a lot of issues. But do think this will have impact on the Engagment leagues
Glad I found the post. Good to have the heads up.

Yes, I remember that type of engagement level from my heydays and making it to the top. Those days are long gone and now I just check the bottom of the list to see if I made it on or not. ;)

Lol on the newbiepalooza. Yes, that one was to get more user engagement but it was also a contest. People commenting there do so for a chance to win prizes. It is different than daily conversing, imo. I did a lot of that myself in the early days, but I've become friends with many of them and those type of conversations are now on discord. Can't say that is good or bad, but we are definitely not using RCs!

There is also the UA score that seems to factor in the comments on our posts. People may be much more conservative with those going forward.
Guess it will be grab a rope and hang on see where we end up.
Maybe it won't be much worse than bandwidth, which surprisingly was never much of a problem for me. Although I would often hear others speak of it.
I know you are right though Discord would save a lot on the blockchain resource end.

Well, there's no way of knowing until it happens, apparently, so it could be nothing happens, or people's ability to do things improves. I feel like I'm being warned, though. Beware. At any rate, I could have asked how much we need to put in if we want to do more but I figured I'd save that for later when we might know what's happening and have some better answers. I'm feeling like all the leaguers could be affected, which saddens me. If it ends up being that low SP, who has been using the platform the most because they want to earn SP since they didn't have it to begin with and don't have the resources to invest end up being reduced or shut out, while those with the highest SP who aren't using the platform other than to delegate end up with the all the RCs—it just seems to me that there will be a lot more unhappy people, as indiscriminate, impartial, or fair as that may be.

As it is, I'm less worried about myself (though I'm wondering just how low this goes), because I have invested some. It's not tens of thousands, but it's more than a few hundred bucks. I'm not sure how anyone could be expected to put in more just to use the STEEM social media platform.

So, there, I've said it, and now we get to see what happens next, and hopefully, the warning I was feeling I was getting will all be in my head. :)

Looks like we got our answer! So many small fishes now having to check RCs before commenting/upvoting. I'm just going to wait and see what happens once equilibrium is achieved.

Other than the blockchain going down (oh wait, it's done that twice already), I'm not sure how it could get any worse at this point, @beeyou. I'm sorry for everyone who can no longer function much at all, let alone at the level they were accustomed to. Probably not much more to do than kick back and wait. Hopefully it doesn't take that long. I'm afraid, though, just like my foreboding before, that it's not going to shake out that much different than it already is, and if so, as @davemccoy points out in his post, the rest of the people who have been hanging on either leave or Steemit Inc. comes up with a fix.

Let me put it another way, if after the RC system goes into effect those activities run down your RCs faster than they did bandwidth, then by definition you were taking advantage of the inaccuracies in the bandwidth system to overburden the blockchain and you were passing the associated costs onto your fellow Steemians. It's a dynamic system that will be changing all the time forever. Specific numbers cannot be given. It is totally impartial. All it cares about is how much resources are being consumed by the network, who is consuming the resources, and how much stake they have. All of those variables will be constantly changing, which is why specific predictions can't be made. If you want to consume more resources than everyone else, then you have to have more STEEM powered up. That was clearly the intent behind bandwidth, and that same intent is behind RCs. Bandwidth is just worse at it. If you believe in Steem and want to make it sustainable, then you will have to adjust your behavior or power up more STEEM.

Yet at the same time, if comments at a human social interaction level turn out to be too expensive for the blockchain to handle, that's a real problem for the sustainability of Steem itself. Essentially what it says is that the current technological level of Steem is insufficient to handle its core functions.

I don't think that's likely to happen but I don't see how you can be essentially blasé about it.

Okay. Thank you for the information and clarification. We'll see how things shake out then, and hope that all goes well with the HF 20 in general, and RCs in specific.

Well said. I think that's really the crux of it. People need to power up some STEEM and actually partake in the contributed value of this blockchain rather than trying to solely exploit it at someone else's expense. (not directed at anyone in particular). But really, way too many people here are focused on selling out their steem rather than powering it up to become partners with the community instead of exploiters of it.

That being said, if people adjust their behavior in anticipation of the changes and are more careful with how much they post and comment, they might not encounter any issues and there may be fewer issues generally.

So, just like with the reduction in the daily vote target, the average user will need to monitor how often they interact with other social media users on the Steem blockchain. And just as the vote target reduction added to the cognitive load of users (specifically newer ones), so will this new RC system. It seems that we keep increasing system complexity at the cost of Steem user experience.

This doesn’t actually sound like a scaling solution when you make these kinds of comments. Is less use of the blockchain the goal of these hard forks? Because that’s not really how you solve scaling problems.

And if these were the actual goals and/or the expected outcomes for the protocol changes, why are we only hearing about it now, once the hard fork has been accepted by witnesses?

My problem with RC credit system is:

Votes and token actions will require relatively few RCs, for example, while comments will consume far more RCs. Again, this is based entirely on the amount of computational resources these activities consume.

Especially the part that talks about Comments does this mean I am going to eventually need to balance my cost of casting a vote, verse leaving a comment on an individual post? Because all the resources are coming from one place or will vote power rebuild as it does at the current rate, and will we now need to wait for a second rebuild of RC to make a comment? Like glen above I sometimes like to leave long comments, and or lots of them.

I didn't initially join steemit for the crypto. In fact I still have only a very limited understanding of it. I do understand that today and all the yesterdays I was on steemit I could comment as much as I wanted, but had to limit my votes. After tomorrow am I still going to be able to comment all I want?

While I could easily be wrong about this, I strongly suspect that any established user who comments at a human pace won't have any issues with RCs, any more than we have any issue with bandwidth now.

Very-low-SP users could have an issue, and low-SP bots will definitely have an issue.

I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens. then.

All you want until you run out of resource credits, and it's not entirely clear if you will be able to quickly deduce just exactly what that means in concrete terms, or if any interface will have any way to immediately track it. Look how long it took for various front ends and tools sites to show you your voting power at all. Now this? We'll all be guessing for a while, which is why the warnings on this page and others like it just say "unexpected somethings might seem messed up for you for an unknown amount of time" and that's basically what any uncomfortable, inconvenient truth comments on this page are pointing out as a problem for our user base and those of us who live in the communities trying to explain it to them as witnesses, and community leaders they look to on a daily basis in the absence of reliable information from "above".

Do you think it will take long for a steemd type bar, or a steemworld circle system to be developed? The RC thing is going to be the hardest thing to get used to at first I guess. We will see what will be.

Votes are a transaction that has an RC price as are post/comments and wallet transfers and so on.

Yes they are related.

HOW they will replenish and how many votes and comments per cycle of recharge you can make have direct correlation to stake weight.

It remains poorly documented and to some degree unarticulated as to how "fast is recharge/replenish" and how "many per charge" of a thing a user will have - today for example we know what voting power is in relation to bandwidth and can say to some degree you will use 100% over 10 votes a 24 hour cycle at 100% each, with the slider enabling some throttling of your utilization as it works now, to enable using your 100% " vote bandwidth "fuel" at a better mpg so to speak, as a metaphor.

We just don't seem to have clear path to what this will mean after the HF.

Is that good news? No it should be made clear to users in plain and certain terms.

Has it been? No, because everyone who should be able to tell us, seems to at best be guessing and at worst not providing info at all.

Further, the interfaces we eventually developed to show voting power percentages on various front ends and tools sites won't work with this anymore, without repairs and changes to their code. So it's going to be "surprise surprise surprise" for a few days to weeks while "things balance" which is doublespeak in code, for we'll tell you once we figure it out after people start using it and it plays itself out.

As you aptly surmised in the post this question originated from, @bashadow , "We will see what will be."

And that's why many are expressing concern on this page about pushing out so many changes at once, and not even being able to explain them by the people who invented them.

Thanks, now we play the waiting game. I kind of feel sorry for the front end people, I really like @stemchillers vote gauge, gonna be sad to see it maybe not work. He will get one up I am sure that will work fine again I am sure.

On the plus side, maybe some big votes when the sliders don't work like they used to. ;-}

It's going to be quite a show for a few hours/days/weeks/months?

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.21
TRX 0.06
JST 0.026
BTC 28714.48
ETH 1806.70
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.83