Is Facebook working on its own cryptocurrency to run Facebook on?
Read this Zerohedge article. This is indeed the next logical step. If I were Zuckerberg, I would do this 100%. I quote:
Meet The World's Next Central Banker: Mark Zuckerberg
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/09/2018 - 15:45
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-09/meet-worlds-next-central-banker-mark-zuckerberg
Within the last week, Facebook announced a ban on all advertisements about bitcoin, initial coin offerings and other cryptocurrencies.
Facebook (along with Google) virtually controls Internet advertising. So their policies have enormous influence over consumer behavior.
Banning ICO advertisements on its platform, for example, will certainly have a negative impact on the amount of money flowing into new ICO’s.
Facebook said it instituted this ban to “protect its users” from financial scams in the cryptocurrency sector. At least, that’s the “official” reason.
And in fairness, there is a ridiculous amount of fraud out there — countless scammy ICO’s and appallingly stupid tokens and coins.
But it’s also possible that Facebook’s main driver in this move goes beyond its desire to protect the well-being of its nearly 2 billion users.
It was only a month ago that Mark Zuckerberg said Facebook would study encryption and the blockchain to “see how best to use them in our services.”
And one of the speakers at the crypto conference that one of our team members attended in New York City yesterday confirmed Facebook is investing a ton of capital into blockchain right now.
It stands to reason that Facebook’s decision to ban crypto advertisements may be rooted in eliminating its own competition, i.e. Facebook may be working on its own proprietary blockchain and cryprocurrency to deploy on its own platform.
One possibility is that Facebook could adopt a similar model to Steemit – a decentralized social network that operates on the blockchain.
It’s up to Steemit’s users to police the site, not a central authority. And the platform rewards its users for good content with small amounts of cryptocurrency and penalizes users for spam and “fake news.”
This would solve a huge problem for Facebook, which has already come under fire from governments across the world for not doing enough to moderate user content including “fake news,” “hate speech,” etc.
Facebook has already hired an army of content moderators, but this is barely been able to make a dent in solving the company’s problem.
So adopting a model like Steemit ,which rewards users with specialized crypto could certainly make sense.
This wouldn’t be the company’s first foray into the arena, either.
When social games like Farmville were popular (maybe they still are, who knows), gamers could pay for e-goods with an in-game currency. Then Facebook created its own currency for people to trade in and out of Farmville and other games.
A full-blown Facebook Token is the logical next step.
Given Facebook’s worldwide dominance, its tokens would have the potential to become enormously popular, practically overnight, and used in everyday transactions in the real world.
The big hope with Bitcoin is that it may one day disrupt conventional fiat currencies. Maybe so. But Bitcoin still has a steep adoption curve before it becomes truly disruptive.
Facebook Tokens, on the other hand, would be adopted by hundreds of millions of people right from the start.
You’d be able to buy and sell products in Facebook Tokens, send money and remittances, pay contract employees overseas, and engage in all sorts of cross-border transactions.
This would essentially make Mark Zuckerberg the world’s central banker… the one person with control over the first truly global currency.
Given that he already controls the #1 media source in the world and has substantial influence over consumer behavior, launching a Facebook Token would solidify his position as the most powerful person on the planet.
I don’t see how Facebook could become like steemit. Steemit is decentralised. No one owns steemit. Facebook is a centralised site running in centralised servers owned by a company. For example, if the courts ordered something to be taken down, they can force Facebook to do so. They can’t do the same to steemit. I don’t see how the models are compatible? They could adopt a crypto currency payment or tipping system but not full blockchain.
They can build incentives by creating a system of blockchain based paid upvotes. Of course this is not decentralized, but people would not care much. Anybody with a huge following would profit from this and like the new system.
But you are right, STEEMIT is 1000x better and even if they start such a system, it will never be comparable because the censorship free, decentralized blockchain is the future. Especially in times of fake news and truths being called fake news.
They could build incentives as you describe but this is effectively bolting on a blockchain to an existing site/ application.
To change Facebook to become similar to steemit would require a complete redesign and relinquishing control which is something I’m pretty sure they won’t do.
Hope so @ew-and-pettenrs In my opinion fb could add only some kind of payments for their ad services (and fb shops). And you can exchange its crypto. Users won't get any cash for their time on fb or from likes. Btw do you know that two days ago twitter posted its first-ever profit 330 mln :D Why they even exist and who pay their bills and what for ;0
No, I did not know. But twitter is not gonna be a thing in the future. We already have a blockchain based, paid short message service running on the STEEM blockchain. I forgot the name but it makes twitter obsolete already.
Not entirely true. 0,005% of users (the 35 whales) control most (app. 80%) of the voting power:
Whilst I agree the majority of Steem is owned by a few whales that does not mean they own steemit. It’s like saying that because most btc is owned by a few then bitcoin is owned by someone, or that because the majority of worldwide wealth is held by the 100 richest people that they own the USD.
exactly!
If that were true you wouldn't be able to google who owns Steemit and it comes up with the owners names and addresses in New York and I think Virginia. If the government wanted something brought down bad enough they'll find a way to bring it down. Just look at all those committing crimes on the dark web who thought they weren't touchable using the dark web and they've just busted the crap out of a whole lot of them.
I don’t know what you found but my understanding is that the software is open source and decentralised and therefore not owned by anyone. There may be a foundation or similar who develop code but if it’s not adopted by the witnesses it doesn’t go anywhere. You can’t have a decentralised block chain that is owned by someone. It’s incompatible.
Steemit, Inc is a privately held company based in New York City and headquartered in Virginia. The company was founded by Ned Scott and Dan Larimer, creator of BitShares, and EOS.[3][4]
DecentralizeToday had an article published giving an overview of the platform and blockchain pointing out how the developers consciously relaunched the currency to assure centralization, even quoting Tone Vays calling the system a Ponzi Scheme [18]
The Steemit Blog operates on the anarchist principles of self governance and community policing. While a novel concept it has opened the doors for abuse through vote selling and potential bullying by wealthier members of the site that use their influence to set policy, control and censor content at will.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steemit
Now take a look at the difference between centralized and decentralized.
What is the definition of centralized:
When the organization has inadequate control over the management, then centralization is implemented
What is the definition of decentralized:
when the organization has full control over its management, decentralization is implemented.
What do you get when you mix facebook and crypto without a verified block chain??
Its called half ass
centralization...this is like saying, the post office will work more efficiently, after new wall paper goes up...unless he is smart enough to adopt Super media tokens, then I am all for Facebook...to steem on lol... is there such a thing as some....transparency?
It seems their platform is built on a mass confusion, misery making algorithm.
Zucks advertisers might not like the idea...
Can you imagine how much more confusing it will be to look at the interface on your facebook page, there 500 new white and blue thumbs, buttons and drop down windows to finally cast a vote? If indeed their going that way...
Remember when Coke tried to change their ingredients to compete with pepsi?
Hahahaha...i might be wrong.
Could it be, in the not to distant future..FB. be renamed ...Facebook Classic?
Great thinking cap article !
Lynn
Decentralization gets rid of the middle man. How do you propose Facebook intends to remove themselves from being in the middle between advertisers and users? That is how they make money. They may come out with facebook coin that exists on a blockchain. But, facebook itself will always be totally centralized. Therefore it is doomed to fail when blockchain popularizes. Zuckerberg is scared!
Of course it won't be decentralized, but it will be incentive enough for millions of returning users wishing to make a quick buck by posting about their lives. A paid upvote system is possible without decentralized blockchain. Most people will not care as long as they get a few cents for their posts.
Of course a system like this cannot be compared to censorship free, decentralized STEEMIT platform.
It doesn't get rid of anybody in the middle. There are plenty of people in the middle who run the whole system (those people aren't volunteering their time) and there are still the fat cats at the top.
Es ist klar dass diese Giganten schon lange eigene Abteilungen haben, die mit Cryptos arbeiten und neue Ideen ausarbeiten für dieses Thema. Es ist nur eine Frage der Zeit, bis diese damit raus kommen. Guter Post lieber @ew-and-patterns, der zeigt wo wir uns gerade befinden und es zeigt dass Crypto nicht alleine die Lösung ist, sondern wie wir Cryptos einsetzten und von wem.
No big deal. It's financial Darwinism. Idiots will flock to the things that breed vanity and waste their money for a lesser service. With SJW madness going in silicon valley FB and Goolag are going to get hit bad.
Rich people don't frequent dollar stores. Crypto-rich people won't touch FakeCoin. It'll have the status of a dollar store or like those cheap beauty products that celebrities promote.
That may be true but you know there's a few hundred thousand abandon Steemit accounts. One mans junk is another man's treasure as they say. In this world there are way more people with junk then treasure. It's the small stuff that comes back and bites you.
Worse things have happened. There was a very good story in this video.
The point is that those who choose wisely will do well in their lives. People are wasting their time on things that doesn't matter. Those things will sting them at their death beds. Cryptocurrencies are the greatest wealth transfer in history. Financial Darwinism will take care of things.
Yes - think I wrote about my thoughts already, pretty sure Zucki is planning something like that
Zuckerberg is a Facebook application developer.amazing
No one could replace steemit but this could effect it.We don't want any competitor for steemit. Fuck you zucky
Who has read "Error" by Neal Stephenson? The idea of having a game with a complete economy surround it to trade items was there already laid out. A cryptocurrency would be the perfect fit for it. Just a matter of time, until this will get implemented.
Good post,