You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Tests Of Focus & Purpose: WHY Steemit When It's Economic Structure Is Worse Than America's...
Back in 2016 we were very idealistic and fully believed in the platform. We behaved ethically and had a belief that it was about content and interaction as we slowly built up our reps and followings.
I had some good times, but am grateful that I woke up to the corruption at the core of the platform and took my money out when it was still worth something.
Now I’m back with a totally different attitude. There are still some awesome people and some amazing content. And this platform works better than anything I’ve ever seen online. I totally packed a sad a fucked off for a while but I missed the place.
As far as the money goes – it’s all a rigged game, and these days I’m happy to play it like any other crypto. If I can buy Steem, make gains and then sell it – I’m in. And right now, I think the odds of Steem going up from 12 cents are reasonable, but if it goes pop, nevermind, 12 cents was cheap!
I still say it is more about incompetence than corruption, but in any case it is too exhausting, because they look the same to the casual observer and the results are the same.
I always used to disagree with you about that, and the more angry I got with what was going on, the more convinced I was that people with so much money couldn't be that fucking clueless, so it had to be an evil plan to crash the platform and make more money.
But now I have no frigging theory and am more inclined to agree with you!
note my addition to the thread below (or possible above it gets voted up) in response to whatsup...
I’d say there’s probably a bit of both, though the larger element at play would most likely be systemic.
In theory, the decentralized system was supposed to have advantages over centralized. But in practice, the way it was designed from the start - like any other system - was sure to have flaws. At least in a centralized system, there tends to be a hierarchy of power where one or a few highly competent people can take the reigns, assess where the flaws at, and initiate the change. Without such leverage though... well, I guess that’d depend on the strength of the system.
I imagine that Dan fucked off early because he recognized that there were flaws in the system that couldn’t be fixed once it was in motion, just as much if not more because of his differences with Ned. Though either way, I wouldn’t have imagined Ned was really in a position where anyone person could’ve altered the course of the ship so dramatically so as to assess every single detail of what was flawed and restructure everything as would’ve been needed to get things “on course.” (And then again, what would “on course” look like exactly, in this decentralized world where there are hundreds/thousands of different opinions and visions of what this could be).
Though, who knows. we can make guesses and loose assessments, but there’s always a lot more details to a complex system that’d require understanding to properly say - and more likely than not, it’d be impossible to pin the causes down to any one root...
Yeah, Dan openly admitted he thought it was broken and in ways it is.
No question about it. But that doesn't mean they are fatal flaws.