I’m going to cut right to the chase because we need some straight talk.
At its core, Steem is nothing but computer software and a collection of data. Anyone can run this software and broadcast the data that is stored in the Steem blockchain. When it comes to the blockchain, “saving Steem” is simply a matter of running a node...or a matter of a group of people running a node with the same version of software on it.
Nobody can prevent the “saving” of Steem in this regard. Neither Justin, nor Binance, nor any future malicious individual or collusive group of individuals can stop it. Steem - as a digital object - can live on forever, so long as someone wants to store the data and run the software.
So what makes Steem something more that can actually be “saved” and is worth fighting for?
The community.
This is what makes Steem what it is. The developers, stakeholders, witnesses, businesses, bloggers, and the casual voters and observers are what make Steem a thing worth salvaging. All of these people are also what makes it impossible to destroy such a thing.
A community cannot be bought and destroyed...unless that community chooses to be for sale and subsequently dismantled.
We currently have people in our Steem community who are losing hope. We have people in our Steem community who are angry. We have people in our Steem community who are taking charge, giving up, or completely indifferent. And it’s OK to have any of these feelings or to take action or to do nothing.
But let’s be clear about how Steem can be “saved.”
We don’t need to endlessly battle with centralization. We don’t need to be infuriated with Justin Sun, Ned Scott, Binance, or Huobi. We don’t need to decide whether or not to send anyone’s tokens to @null. We don’t need to placate any group trying to take advantage of the current situation for their own benefit.
As a community, we can simply reject all of it. We can move on without a lasting struggle. We can part ways without “stealing” anything from anyone. We can take those of us who wanted a decentralized Steem in a new direction and we can go in that new direction with like-minded people.
The community is not stuck in one geographical location. We live in the digital realm. We are free to move. We have the means to move. We are nomads of the blockchain. Our home is not a place.
Our home is the connections we’ve made over the past four years. That home is not defined by one man, one website, or one token.
So how do we “save” Steem - the community that is Steem?
It’s simple: We move.
Nothing is preventing us from separating ourselves from the current Steem blockchain. There is an opportunity for a clean break from the baggage that has held Steem back for the past four years. There is an opportunity to simply throw off the shackles of centralization. There is an opportunity for us to learn from past mistakes, correct them, and improve upon the existing code and how we interact as a community.
All we need to do is run a different version of the current software. The community - with its developers, stakeholders, witnesses, businesses, bloggers, and the casual voters and observers - can simply choose to build on and follow those running the new version of software.
That’s it.
We would no longer need to stress about what ignorant or detrimental thing Justin Sun and his company or friends can do to the blockchain. We would no longer have to stress about Steemit’s stake being sold or how it can be used to centralize the blockchain. We would no longer have to stress about vote campaigns to “take back the chain,” watching every day and wondering if this will be the day Steem “dies.”
We’ve never lost the Steem blockchain. It can’t be lost.
We can’t lose the community unless we no longer want to be a part of it.
We don’t need to win this fight. There isn’t even a need for a fight. We have the ability to simply ignore it or reject it.
Sure, it may be good for appearances to “defeat” a power that’s trying to centralize the blockchain. It would be a nice display of the power of DPoS. But it’s not needed.
A much stronger message can be communicated by simply picking up and moving on; by showing the crypto world that this community can’t be sold or absorbed by any central power; by letting the old chain - the one that’s under attack and on the verge of centralization - to simply rot; by leaving those who think that we can be owned left all by themselves on a dead chain with a worthless token.
This isn’t some pie-in-the-sky hypothetical. It can happen. It very likely will happen soon enough.
It’s up to each of you as individuals if you want to participate in the migration. It’s always your choice. It has always been your choice. Don’t let fear, confusion, uncertainty, or even the ignorance of others get in the way of that choice.
Steem can live on. It may be under a different name, but the name does not define us or what we are capable of achieving.
All of us are the Steem community. We are “Steem” itself.
Wherever we go as a community, Steem goes with us.
I have made up my mind. I know the future that I prefer. It’s not a future with this current version of Steem and the baggage of Steemit Inc. that has plagued this blockchain for four years.
I will be moving on.
Who’s coming with me?
Bernie rides again.
only a fool would follow someone like you.
what do you offer?
your own version of censorship.
and you tell folks you hate to kill themselves.. and chase them away.
anyone have any idea how many folks he has chased off?
because i keep meeting them outside steemit..
they hate berniesanders because he made this place unprofitable and unfun..
and he literally told them to kill themselves.
so he did LITERALLY everything to ruin other people..
and now you folks are like..
BERNIE SAVE ME..
be careful who you follow.. make sure you know where they are going.
He is what he is -- likely a psychopath, at the very least a narcissist. But he has a lot of people lining up to suck his dick cuz he has some scratch... I'd rather scratch my balls, thank you.
I'm comin' with ya Bernie!
Oh how I long for a chain where @berniesanders is the worst asshole we've got around.
I am.
Classic movie
corona virus for sure :P
I agree with many that fighting off an overtake attempt would be a great story for DPOS (which is needed as imo it has many weaknesses)... but also don’t see the point of settling for broken in the process.
The community is what adds value, and the value stays with the community.. where ever they find themselves.
There is something exciting about the idea of doing this right, as a community.. without all the baggage and bad decisions in the past made by a few. I guess we will see what happens.
It would be a great story for Steems DPoS but the fact that this is even occurring reveals a clear security issue with the blockchain. If it works then it would be a legend worth telling.
In.
There goes the neighborhood.
Can we fork her out already? lol
It can be arranged.
That is how I feel about Steem, and the world at this point too. Can we all just go somewhere else and try this shit again? Just maybe use some of the glaring lessons that we have learned from this mess?
Maybe moving is the only solution to save steem. I don't really know. I don't know if we will win the fight or not, but I'm just keeping it and a lot are doing the same. I think we have nothing to lose anyway, the most important that we stick together. The community matters more of course.
Just five more minutes.
On y va!
Posted using Partiko iOS
I still think all we need is Hulk Hogan to come here and blog. Then everything will be fine.
How would this be different from previous Golos and Whaleshares forks? Those communities are still operating, but WLS at least has virtually no value. Down considerably from it's initial cost, something like 99%. Who would be the buyers of the new STEEM and what exchanges would be available to buy it on?
Also, for existing dapps, would they be able to run on the forked chain? What would it take for them to migrate?
Lastly, I understand that STINC was running some critical infrastructure beyond witness nodes. I'm not clear what it was, but isn't it still going to be needed? Who will pay for that and maintain it?
Basically, I fully support the idea behind this solution but am unclear about the pragmatism for winding up with a blockchain that is as successful as this one has been. We may destroy our investment at the same time we're removing value from Justin's.
Timing and the fact that Steem was still operating in an arguably viable state at the time. Now, it's a dead man walking. Plus Golos was launched as an ICO and was explicitly targeted at a narrow market, which makes it quite different. I don't know much about whaleshares although I've heard it had some odd (to me) ideas about how to differentiate.
Practical considerations are important ones, I agree on that.
This would be a much larger migration of devs, stakeholders, and apps running on the chain. It's also not fundamentally changing the code or being run by incompetent people. The resources would be much greater than either of those "forks."
Anyone who wants to buy into the community, I imagine, would be buyers. The token would be available on whatever exchanges list it. The same way Steem started, but this time, having an established community is an advantage.
Yes.
Pretty much just a name change, if needed.
Yes, and it can be funded via witness rewards or the SPS, or even self-funded. Donations could work as well.
I would ask an other question : What will happen to our steem power in the case of such fork ? @ats-david
Your Steem Power would remain as it is. The fork wouldn’t touch the current chain. It would go on as long as there were enough witnesses to run it.
The new chain created by the fork would likely give you the same balance but with a new token instead.
You make some good points. Weku also is a Steem fork, and I think that is performing better than WLS. Nodes and APIs do cost money, and are things Stinc provides currently. There may be more, but I am aware only of the #irredeemables Github which was just a list of accounts Stinc censored on it's front end.
Thanks!
Weku crapped out, sorry to say
For some reason I can't get to the original post to comment, IDK what the question is
what happened with Weku, basically. It looked like it crapped out to me
Yup... That's pretty much the story I guess, I got off there a couple of months ago. I guess people are still blogging there, but not me. I'm not doing much here until things get sorted out. I'm working doing articles for NewRightNetwork a new news blog. It's a lot like what I hoped Informationwar would turn out to be. I just published my first article yesterday. I'll email it to you on Proton
good lord, I'll actually have to check that email ;>
Damn. I haven't been a regular there, but I read posts from time to time, the last I thought was only a couple weeks ago. Too bad it died off. What happened?
idk the particulars, check with @richq11
but there was some stench going on
I havent posted there since I went down with the injury last october
Well, at least we're still here.
I too have wondered who would run this infrastructure. especially as the value will probably tank a lot more than it already has. If this is done, it would behoove the new structure to figure a way to comply with regulations in the sense of allowing fiat to crypto buy in/out. This would bypass the exchanges and possibly set an example to the rest of the crypto world that the exchanges aren't necessary.
Golos is also centralized, the 'initiative groups' behind seemingly just any fork prefers to reserve enough funds from itself to be able to 'govern' the fork.
The initial value of the new token would be the same as it is here, the power to vote.
The second value would be the willingness of all of us to exchange it for tangible goods and services.
This protocol/token is an awesome example of the second way to add value (it's not very successful right now?)
https://paywithink.com/
And it powers all the transactions for real goods on :
https://www.listia.com/
Posted using Partiko Android
I don't mind the fork. The only thing I want though is a return of the devs. Without the Steemit, Inc devs that resigned I don't see a future for Steem.
There are many devs besides the Steemit devs. BlockTrades alone has far more devs than Steemit ever had (even when it comes to devs that know Steemd code) and when you add in community devs, the numbers get quite impressive.
I think you bring a lot to this blockchain, and I'm grateful. But I also think that Vanderberg and @roadscape are irreplaceable.
They are both good devs, but they are absolutely not replaceable. You could have tried to argue the same thing for Dan Larimer, for example. And to be blunt, while Michael's a good blockchain dev, I have better and they work together better too.
So B-trades, I get the suspicion that this fork is already being prepped, but is there any talk in the slack I'm not in (even though my partner is) about how the trustless system will take place that would prevent, say, a vengeful JustinSun from simply coming in and messing shit up again just to prove a point (exactly fits his personality profile)
Well, I see your recent post is highly recommended so maybe I can harvest some answers there
I'm planning a future post on this subject, stay tuned.
If these next talks fail and Justin doesnt budge, if you put your weight behind the new chain, im sure many would follow...
That #Sunny!BabyBoy plays immature games on twitter blocking pretty much all Steemians. How can somebody like that be trusted anyways?
Are you actually saying that you can handle the development of the Steem blockchain better than Steemit, inc was?
If so, where were you hiding all this time? I know you did the SPS but that's very little compared to what you claim.
Also, I am not just talking about coding expertise. They had an amazing vision and knew what to code. Look at Voice from Dan Larimer, and you quickly see that all we lost when he left is a deluded man.
Yes, I am, and I wouldn't even break a sweat to do it.
I haven't been hiding anywhere. People who closely follow the tech side of blockchains know BlockTrades as one of the strongest in the business.
I was the first programmer and the software manager hired by Dan Larimer when he started his new company, Invictus Innovations, to build blockchains. Eventually he ran short of funds and couldn't pay our team anymore, so I started by a second company to focus on blockchain tech (my first company focuses on electronics design software).
My company wrote the peer-to-peer code which enables the exchange of data in the Steem blockchain. We also were heavily involved in the development of the graphene blockchain library on which Steem was based.
The Steemit programmers worked in my basement when they got started and we often exchanged ideas about the design of it. And they've often contracted with us to develop code and provide support and personnel.
As far as general background in other blockchains, we've launched an EOS-based blockchain for Dan's dad, Stan Larimer, so we're also very conversant with EOS code. And running an exchange, we've had a lot of experience integrating with most of the popular blockchains out there. And there's numerous other blockchain projects we've worked on in one fashion or another, including coding the "rules" of blockchains on a contract basis.
I have a big vision for Steem as well, and it goes well beyond the social media site it is today, or even any suggestions I've ever seen for improvements. It's the main reason I'm investing so much time here now: the recent turmoil here has made me decide to bring the technology I've been thinking about for the past two years to Steem, instead of doing it as a new project.
And I don't mean to say that I'm the only one either. We have a huge group of people with many ideas for how to make this a better place.
Thanks for this answer.
I am curious about your vision.
And I hope that SMTs work gets completed.
I @mammasitta trust you !
The Blocktrades team actually wrote the p2p layer of the Steem blockchain.
And I imagine that team didn’t get involved in coding much because Steemit Inc. had a massive reserve of funding and their own devs, as well as their own plans for the blockchain. And they were also the gatekeepers of which code would be deployed.
In the past, several people wrote code and submitted PRs, only to have them completely rejected by Steemit in favor of their own misguided vision. This effectively made community-led upgrades a complete waste of resources, as anything not in line with Ned’s plan would be dismissed anyway.
And I should also note that there are more devs able to submit code outside of Blocktrades’ team as well. I would also expect more to get involved knowing that the old gatekeeper is now gone.
So glad to catch this comment 🙏
Downvoted to partially offset the upvote of SteemCleaners.
Understandable. Thanks for letting me know. Was wondering if you were against a fork or not. :)
Look at my last post I wrote before the softfork (I didn't know about its development, since I'm not a member of the "secret group of 65 people").
My hope was to get some PR from Sun for Steem(it), and if he does something stupid, to fork the chain afterwards (i.e. a fork backdated from the block where he takes over). But a token swap and a migration to TRON was a nogo for me.
That our witnesses put the softfork in place was impressive, but took away some of our options. PR for Steem(it) will no longer be available from Sun. The Devs are now gone.
So we have nothing left but a fork. Let's hope that the key applications (Splinterlands, 3Speak) will run on the fork and that someone finishs the SMT's via SPS.
I agree that we can get rid of the Ned problem one last time.
You are saying it is nothing but running a software in the computer. I have few layman questions here. Can you please answer?
From what I understand, Forking out is starting a new chain with the same data with just an exception that steemit's stake will be sent to null in the new chain. If that is the case, will all the current users be available in both the chain?
If I use a web interface and try to login with the wif, I will be taken either inside Steem or the new one based on what node the web interface is using. Is that right? So, after the fork I should technically be able to login to the user accounts in both the chains with same wif right?
This will create a new currency. Probably Steem Classic or something. We have to then identify exchanges to make them list this. Exchanges will then have Steem as well as Steem classic listed. Right?
This act will have a massive impact on both the prices. Steem might fall. Steem Classic might pump etc. But all the current users will have equal stakes in both the Blockchain right?
Yes.
It will be up to interfaces to connect to the right chain and to inform their users which chain they're connecting to. I would assume that some of them will choose one chain or the other and not use both.
Your keys should not change. They will be retained as part of the fork.
Possibly. They may choose to list one over the other, both, or neither.
Theoretically, yes.
Thanks. That's clear 👍
Moving on is fine, I still do not see how that is going to happen. Who is going to decide on the software for the fork? Who is going to develop the software for the fork? Who is going to decide what software is going to be used on the new chain when it comes time to do a hard fork? Who is going to promote the Chain. Who is going to advocate for the new chain? Part of the problem we are currently in is because no other entity than Steemit was allowed/able to offer up any changes to the software, it all had to go through steemit for some reason. How is the new fork going to decide what get updated/upgraded, fixed, or introduce new tools?
If when there is a real alternative to Steem Block Chain,I'll just continue to sit here, participate here, and wait for the total looming disaster that will be Tron's first hard fork of the chain. it wasn't the witnesses, it wasn't the investors, it wasn't the user, that decide what went to the witnesses for testing when a new hard fork was issued. It was steemit that issued the hard fork software. There was some minor input by user groups, investor groups and witness groups, but at the end of the day it was steemit that decided what went into a hard fork.
Who is going to decide when and how a hard fork is going to be run in this new sister chain? Who is going to write the software? Who is going to advocate for the change? Those need to be thought about and answered before I would make any move anywhere else.
Your assumption is that nobody else is capable of doing such things?
The SPS was coded by @blocktrades and his team. There are other coders submitting things on github all the time. The problem was, our centralized Steemit team had their own (flawed) vision for Steem.
We don’t have to follow them anymore.
My assumption was that so far all the HF's were run through a single group, that they decided what got in the fork software. That is the only assumption I have made. I know steempeak had plans building for a hard fork after the SMT hard fork went through, so no I did not assume that only they could code a hard fork, what I assumed was they were the ones in complete control over what got in to a hard fork.
In the new sister chain, who is going to decide what goes in the future hard forks that are needed, wanted or desired? Who is going to advocate for the changes? Who is going to implement it? I understand that it is the witnesses that currently do the testing of the hard forks for steem block chain, part of their "Job", is it still going to be part of the witness job in a future sister chain.
If/when there is a serious chat or talk about a sister chain, then these are things that are going to need to be known. Why trade one overlord for another?
Stakeholders?
Anyone who wants to.
Witnesses who run the code.
What overlord?
Stake holders, meaning a 1 vote with each account regardless of stake size? A person with 25 SP powered up equal to a person with 1,000,000 SP powered up? Stake holders unless it is a 1 to 1 thing, then what would be equal when it comes to governance? An SPS type system? I myself do not think it works about as well as a dPoll that is shut down after someone can say we won, as has happened before on steemit. The term stake holders holds so many different meanings and levels of power with it.
You have 7 changes that someone/group/or business would like to see happen. You can only do 4 of those changes at a time because of uncertainty how one change will/would effect one of the others. The reason for the resistance on the part of steemit devs about doing more than just an SMT Hard Fork, due to the uncertainty of how a decrees in the withdrawal time would work with it. Changing the withdrawal time frame according to them was not and is not an easy thing to do, it effects a lot of other parts of the software.
I am not trying to be argumentative about this, just trying to point out some things that really do need to be thought of.
Implementation: So the only people that can be witnesses are those that have the ability to formulate and implement code changes, no investors, no cheer leader types, just developer type witnesses? I really don't think that would work. From what I understand there is a lot more to implementing a software update, than there is to changing what file your node points to. I've watched in the steem-chat witness room some of the issues that pop up during the Hard Fork change overs, there are always issues at first.
These were but a few of the issue about a block chain. If any one can do it then they would not be so rare. If so then I guess there really is no reason to worry about Tron dev team upgrading the steem block chain.
But we as a community need to think of these things if we are going to be prepared for an eventual sister fork, so that we can at least have a small idea of what it will entail.
!ENGAGE 25
Reputation should carry a weight on voting, perhaps.
@ats-david you have received
25 ENGAGEfrom @bashadow!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
You might consider what is actually left of the team Steemit had assembled. @gerbino, @theoretical, @vandeberg, @andrarchy, @dantheman, @blocktrades (they may have only worked on prior code. Dunno.), and even @ned are no longer there. Is @sneak still there? Dunno.
Steemit now isn't the Steemit that ran the forks in the past.
Don't forget about @roadscape!
Sorry! I apologize to @roadscape. I am not a developer, and clearly have not paid sufficient attention to who has been doing what for Steem development.
Thanks!
And that is why I am somewhat concerned with a Tron Ran Hard Fork. Do they have the experience to work it, are they going to be in the Steem-chat witness room during the upgrade to assist those that are having issue with the software like steemit has done in the past. I watched the action/interaction during the last couple of hard forks, there were issues, the developers did help those witnesses that had issues/problems. I have not seen Tron's team in action, I hope they are capable, and can avoid a shutdown lock up of steem block chain when they do try their first Hard Fork.
I'm not a witness, programmer, developer, creator, or investor, I am only one of those outliers that enjoy using steem block chain, and would like for it to continue being available for a little while longer. I enjoy seeing parts of the world I'll never get to see through the eyes of just plain old everyday people not filtered through magazine editors or government editors.
!ENGAGE
I also very much am thrilled to gain the benefits of good thinking from good people unfiltered by overlords. I want that to keep on being available, and to be more available to more people every day.
Thanks!
there is lot of other people like those are active developers in Bitshares, EOS etc too. From a tech pov there is no shortage of experienced resources.
I know that to be true, although I'd be hard pressed to grasp who is competent at what. The specifics of software development are beyond my understanding, although I can follow logically if specifics are explained to me painfully slowly.
I know you have been here a long time, and serve as a witness. Do you have expertise coding? My assumption is that many witnesses do.
Software Engineering is actually about how things work and interact with people. I am sure most people know one part :)
Well, I lead a graphene blockchain developers at work & is working on cross chain technology for last 2+ years.
Not all the witnesses are programmers. @blocktrades is a veteran programmer, @anyx (is an academic as well), @netuoso are programmers. There could be other programmers as well. Most of the top witnesses like @gtg, @drakos etc posses excellent system administrator/security skills. I am not listing everyone but this is a list of people who are best of my knowledge closely associated with blockchain from a technology perspective. (This is not an exhaustive list)
Also, the skills for the Graphene (Bitshares/Steem/EOS) blockchain development is essentially C++ programming language and a library called BOOST. So in the above has people who work directly with C++ and BOOST libraries for more than 10 years.
The required skill setset would be - Approx 8 years of C++/BOOST expertise and a minimum 10 years of total software development expertise. (Obviously, this is my criteria and its highly subjective.). The total 10 years IMHO is highly required as that makes one humble as she will understand the silly issues associated with software development. Its not necessarily intelligence that matters but common sense and attention to things as opposed to focus.
IMO after the media blitz, I feel we now represent a fight which stands up for the whole crypto community and not only steem. Especially so for block-chains built with DPOS. This is a fight against a centralizing force which is now being watched by almost everyone who is into the crypto world, and our win could be a beacon for decentralization which would set a precedent for many to follow, in the future.
Nevertheless, after seeing some communities on here trying to milk both sides, I do agree with you that maybe it would be better to move on. But I guess we should still try and hang on for a few more weeks as corporate guys do need their money, and blocking it for 13 weeks by powering up should not make sense to them.
But hell ya, I,m moving onto a new chain if it comes to that!
Pretty much agreed here. The barrier is in the cost of the hardware and the cost of funding the developers to move the chain on.
What are the odds Ned didn't tumble enough steem to control the fork, too?
We did turn him on to the possibility.
He would have been blind not to see it.
This new chain gonna vote out the cancers, or embrace them?
Because, I guarantee they will be there, day one.
It would be ridiculous to fork to a different chain and leave the cancer there, growing away. My money is on a fork where the Steemit plague no longer exists.
who defines "cancer" in this new fork?
My mom and dad do.
this qualifies to be in the top 10 replies in the history of the internet! that shit made me laugh so hard:) > I hope others read through the comments section and have the same reaction.
lol. I am glad that I could make someone laugh. People are taking some of this shit too serious right now and expect everyone to have all the answers to all their questions. My parents are the only ones that know it all.
I imagine the ones running the software on their computers.
You do. @ats-david does. @freebornangel does. Probably the cancer will too. Nothing like a bit of chaos to get things off to a good start, eh?
I would argue that the people devoting the resources to coding and running the fork are the ones who can and will likely decide which accounts are the "cancer" that needs to be removed. Then we can decide if we agree and want to follow them on their new fork.
It's all about free association. I would hope that the community would agree about what is the "cancer," but there's always a risk of them not agreeing.
We all have choices to make here. Decide for yourself what is best for you.
Well, as you point out we can only associate with available mechanisms. For instance Steem. Is Steem perfect? No, not at all, and in fact we can see just how broken it is today. Will what's available be perfect? No. Let's just hope it's better.
But I think the question asked was valid. Who defines better? Hopefully the community does, and increasingly so going forward. Folks with the skills to make the platforms communities will choose between can do what @dantheman and @ned did, and enable golden parachutes like the founder's stake and dooming platforms, but if more choices arise, better platforms will win the communties.
We are seeing what golden parachutes do to communities, and it ain't pretty.
Consensus?
It was a rhetorical question...
Posted using Partiko iOS
But how do we identify the stake Ned embedded in case stinc stake went poof?
I may be wrong (though I doubt it), but I would guess Ned has been far more interested in lining his pockets with dirty fiat than hiding stake on Steem. If he actually had any interest in Steem, he would have actually invested in building it instead of looting most of the funds, and then lying (or hiring someone to lie for him) about needing layoffs, slow development, no marketing, and "survival model" due to being out of money
Any hidden stake is stake he could sell with no accountability whatsoever. No reason to think that he didn't.
That supposition holds much water, how do we find out?
There are only 300m coins, seems we could track large chunks of them pretty easy.
I was wondering how poloniex ripped off 12m steem without a peep from the community.
Looks like they bought them from Ned.
We had that chance and lack of decisiveness has us here.
Some may call that prudence.
As it is now, we have to win under the current rules, or stunc has to outrage public decency, again.
Either works, for me.
The status quo won't work? Isn't there a stalemate?
A few hundreds k would be enough to unlock the situation. The stalemate won't last
The only issue is where is that few hudered Ks .. :)
You make a compelling case @ats-david, and I'm inclined to agree with the idea to simply "move it."
I'll preface this with the statement that I know little about the technical end of this equation, but I have a fair handle on the human psychology and dynamics of virtual communities end.
Lately, I have also been thinking about @theoretical's recent resurfacing and the suggestion that perhaps what is needed is to learn from everything that was part of the Steem "experiment" (as I recall, Dan used to call it an experiment) and instead start a completely new chain that uses the positives and and simply doesn't include the negatives, and the loopholes that can be exploited. And yes, I recognize that the process of starting a new chain is infinitely more complex than forking... and far more time consuming, and perhaps we face a bit of a time crunch here.
But let's assume that we do simply fork and create a decentralized home for the community. The challenge with forks... building a bit on what @indigoocean said in her comment... is that they almost inevitably turn out to be "watered down" versions of the original. And I'm not just talking blockchains here, I'm talking all forms of "moves." I've been participant to dozens of community moves related to message board communities going back 20+ years, and the "fail rate" seems to be around 95%. There's a massive dilution/fragmentation issue. People are lazy, and often disengaged.
Now, if a "move" actually could just mean that everything remains basically unchanged except for a few dozen key accounts being "nulled out," that might play. Particularly if some of the now unemployed Steemit, Inc. developers were also onboard, as they might have knowledge of any parts of the system that was "kept close" by Steemit, Inc.
Anyway, I'm certainly open to moving, if it can truly just bypass the relevance of the entire current circus.
I understand the hesitation to believe that this can be successful. But I think a lot of people underestimate the devs and stakeholder interest in running things without a centralized organization pulling the strings and mostly making poor decisions.
I also think people overestimate the success of the current chain once it's left to Justin's control. Without competent devs and users in the community willing to run witness nodes, the chain will be extremely vulnerable to halting, particularly during hard forks. Even with devs that had years of experience on this chain, we were subject to multiple halts of the blockchain when hard forks were implemented. Those people that were able to troubleshoot it and get it operational are now gone.
I'll give you one guess where they'll likely end up. :)
Thanks for the reassurance!
I would be very hopeful that the former devs and other contributors would be onboard with "our" fork; just the fact that they quit Steemit, Inc., as a group, says a lot. I suppose it all fits... Justin acquires yet another blockchain app with no users...
I've always said the community is what it's about. I doubt many crypto projects have anything like it. It's not just about the money. Forking off is an option, but would be disruptive. There will be disagreement about what changes should be made. I assume it would exclude the Steemit stake, but could something be done to reduce the risk of other hostile takeovers?
Yes, there are changes that can be made to reduce sudden takeovers. Whether those can prevent long-term “sneak attacks” remains to be seen, but then I’m not sure if such attacks would even be prudent from an investment standpoint.
I would hope exchanges being non-voting would be one mitigating move.
i have no issues with a hard fork. Justin will ruin Steem and Steemit anyway so we might as well do it know. Justin wants to be a dick? He has NO IDEA what we have in store for him!
Have any people had discussions with exchanges to list this future place or token?
My gut feeling tells me "yes." :)
I m there with you meant to move on.
Resteeming for more visibility
I echo you sentimemts. If we all move together, we'll take the value with us where we go. I posted yesterday about the exact same thing.
But when we do move, we need burn the house down on the way out, by destroying our STEEM, no double token, no crossposting, nothing... Kinda like dusting the dirt off your feet when you leave.
Empty, empty words...
Go Sun! I hope that reason will win
Well think you and I are on the same page here but presently not entertaining the notion of a fork.
Think a ground up redesign / rearchitecting is the way forward but obviously migrating the chain data in some fashion.
Furthermore, think it's time to scrap DPoS. It's been proven to be susceptible to being dominated by any given tycoon whether they understand the nuance or not.
It's a system that is fundamentally flawed on its own but I have a metric shitton of ideas to unfuck it.
I know you and I butt heads because guess we are both alpha types in our respective ways. Nevertheless, I'm a good sport so would be happy to help yall build yours.
Doesn't have to be a zero sum game or whatever.
STEEM doesn't need saving, the world needs saving!! lol
Outside the realm of the software running the blockchain are the exchanges where value may be exchanged for tangible assets to pay operating expenses and to give users a reason to put effort into creating great content.
Indeed.
There's that. But there's also the recent tweets from CZ that indicate they are still awaiting orders from Sun to do it again. Frankly, I have very little trust in exchanges that have manipulated the governance of Steem. I think that was very bad form, and an abuse of the customers.
I wouldn't spit on them if they were burning.
A dex is the thing. No more centralized banksters. Those bastards are a bad bet.
We all with you
First, I think we need to talk with Binance and Huobi they are not Party to a dispute
I think They were deceived
And then we need to unite together
finally creating a special trading platform for steem not an impossible
thank you
It may be time to cut those strings that were holding us back and make a new home that is truly built by the community.
Hi @ats-david - it's great to read your lovely clear declaration... YES.
Posted using Partiko Android
I am 100% in man! I totally share your opinion on the whole situation and the sure way out of it. Just let me know where to go and I will follow!
Peace!
Hi @ats-david , if you have some time, please take a look at the REDPOS protocol concept.
Should a new home be created I wish a better procol builds that home.
That’s it.
Easy said. And yet you cannot give any guarantee about that the community would choose to move and if so, how many?
When someone try to propose an easy solution for a complex problem, something is fishy.
I cannot guarantee anything other than the fact that I will be on the new chain. I don't know what the rest of the community will choose. I have no numbers.
You need to decide for yourself.
So is this a
Or
I think there are going to be complaints from the community about both options, so I'm curious if there might be a 3rd that I'm not seeing/thinking about?
P.S. I'm in for the community, I don't care if the name changes.. as long as the ideal stays the same (as it was at inception, not whatever Ned thought up to line up his exit strategy)
It won't be #1.
If #2 is the selected option, the new chain after the fork will undoubtedly have no Steemit stake. And that's not a problem as the fork will likely be run with a new chain ID. So the current chain can continue on as Steem with all of its current balances. Nothing would need to be taken from Steemit accounts...the balances just wouldn't be added to the accounts on the new chain. They would just not receive the new tokens.
This is not "theoretically" a problem, but poses a fundamental flaw when you talk with anyone who cares about governance and cares about their stake.
If you do this, what is it to say that you wouldn't do this again, simply because you (or the witnesses) don't agree with a single user (or group of users) on the blockchain. It's starts a very dangerous precedent.
I'm not saying that it is wrong, I'm just pointing out the risk of what this action means to the existing Steem community, and to the broader Crypto Market. It's akin to walking on coals for the future of the new blockchain..
I don’t see any dangerous precedent at all. In fact, it falls exactly in line with free association and private property.
If a community wants to follow the chain where a group of people felt that existing entities represented an existential threat to long-term decentralization and security, then why should they not go with those individuals who took their computers and software, adjusted some code, and moved on without those threatening entities? Who is harmed in such a scenario?
And if that community proves to be trustworthy and more people want to invest and participate because it demonstrates that it can operate based on common philosophical principles and also defend itself from existential threats, how is this damaging to the overall crypto community?
I would think that such a community that’s willing to make tough choices but adheres to its principles would be a beacon of light in what is mostly a scammer’s paradise. And again - nobody is taking anything at all away from anyone else. The Steem blockchain would continue as is, assuming the remaining users can support it.
Now if such a community just randomly forked away from people for petty reasons, I would expect them to suffer from a poor reputation. But I don’t believe for a second that escaping centralization and a pretty much guaranteed trashing of a blockchain is going to tarnish a community’s reputation at all. And if such a reputation is gained in that scenario within the greater crypto community, then it just reaffirms the view that there are few principled actors in the crypto space in general.
If it's not an abomination of a hack job, I'll be interested in a fork.
I'm not convinced a simple fork is the best option. @theoretical is undertaking a new development, and I'm very interested in seeing where that goes, but right now a fork is probably the quickest, cleanest way to move on and make the bad people go away.
Keep me on the list if you care to. I'm not everyone's cup of tea, so may not be on your 'most welcome' list. Can't say I'll change either, so make your best judgment =)
Thanks!
I'm totally in! Especially after sitting in on those first few town halls post-takeover, I really got a sense that the community would be coming out quite nicely if/when the fork happened. I see multiple front-ends, dApps, and tons of community & creators coming over, as well as probably bringing in a lot of crypto folks (many of whom listen to Tone Vays) stayed away from Steem because of the Ninja Mine/Centralization.
The biggest thing I would say, let's actually ditch the Steem name completely. It was bad enough always having folks think I was talking about Steam (the gaming platform), I don't want to have a whole extra layer of disassociation to have to do.
I would definitely be willing to do my blogging on the new chain.
Year 2017. Steem saved my life.
Year 2020. It is time we save Steem.
Yo, remember me? LOL Man I have a lot to catch up on! Posting via BUSY.org since you recommend... I have always preferred it anyway. Cheers!
@ats-david
I wish changing what governance structure aka "citizenship" one wanted to participate in were as easy as this would be!
About the value of a new token/chain with all of us on it:
The initial value of the new token would be the same as it is here, the power to vote.
The second value would be the willingness of all of us to exchange it for tangible goods and services.
This protocol/token is an awesome example of the second way to add value (it's not very successful right now?)
https://paywithink.com/
And it powers all the transactions for real goods on :
https://www.listia.com/
I, for one, have been accepting STEEM in exchange for Kratom for years now. (Not one buyer yet though!?)
Thank you for emphasizing that we already have the power and the value because WE ARE the power and the value! 🕉️☀️♥️🙏
it depends on what kinda "move" we're talking about.
i hope it's a sister chain where steempeak/esteem users would have to simply update their apps and not use steemit anymore.
A hard fork is just a continuation of the same chain on a different branch. Apps should have no problems swapping over to that branch.
thank you. i hope that smooth transition happens.
Let's not rush things. Things like this need preparation time.
The witnesses should communicate a timeframe. Let's say in two weeks we split.
Before we announce this though, we need to see hundreds of posts of willing participants, making everybody aware, that we as a community can just pack up and start fresh without any baggage, but with the same token amount on the new chain.
Yes the first months will be bad without any exchange but we can do it.
I would love to see the community unite once more and leave Justin on an empty chain. 90% drop in posts, comments and transactions.
I am back to Steemit after long time. I saw lot of change made in steemit. From your post i can learnt many things today. Lot of information you share by this post. Thanks
Competition is always good and it will allow users to decide what direction is best for them and the community.
I'd like to see any stake voting tron witnesses forked out, not least of why is that my rewards are getting wiped by stake that votes tron.
I think that’s a reasonable thing to do on a fork with a new chain ID. Nothing would be taken from anyone...it just wouldn’t be freely given to those who show contempt for the community and decentralization.
Do we fork the tron witness voting stake, too?
I thought that’s what you were talking about.
In my opinion, it wouldn’t be out of the question to not give free tokens to any account that is actively supporting centralization and the de facto destruction of this blockchain. I actually think it would be quite foolish to willingly grant power/money to those who have demonstrated that they will use it to intentionally act in opposition to the fundamental concept of blockchain technology.
Oh, so it was, glad to hear you supportive of the idea.
I hope it doesn't come to that.
Thanks for hanging in here,...
His exposure was extraordinary in maintaining #steem... Thank you for sharing.. success is your
Yep. Glad you guys are finally catching up on the current perceived HF necessity. Once Justin makes a move we should be ready. We should be talking to exchanges and witnesses should already be discussing how we do it.
On the Korean community thing... No, they are a accessory in the hostile takeover and they should be held accountable. If we go, all proxy stake voting for sock-puppets should be nulled or sent to SPS.
If they want to hold Steem hostage then they should expect that they will not get away scot-free.
They are consciously centralizing the chain, hurting everyones investment and risking the collapse of the economy. They are a hostile entity and should be treated as such.
Who said we’re “catching up?” ;-)
I would not be opposed to that at all.