This is a brief notification for those following me. With HF20, I believe we are seeing and experiencing the result of an update without the support of @dan. This is how I am interpreting this event.
In the past @dan would consult with his other projects like Bitshares and Steem (maybe he still does with Bitshares?).
From my perspective, we may be seeing the drastic difference of Steem's ability to operate without @dan involved. HF19 was a very smooth event. It was released, it changed a lot of things, but the systems remained operational. HF20 has multiple glaring bugs, and when I was reading the list of the patches which are being implemented tonight, I thought to myself as a programmer... and no one thought of these consequences in advance?
When you write new code, you have to understand how that code is going to affect your system. You have to pre-conceive what problems are going to arise from what you wrote, and write the code to ensure those bugs do not happen. With blockchain, it's hard to perfectly bug-test in advance, meaning you have to anticipate bugs in the live system and prevent them in your code.
HF20 did not do this sufficiently.
We now understand why SMT's are not here
To me this reveals, at the very least, a weakness in the Steem blockchain's operation going forward in the near-term. This weakness is the development team (I am not insulting the dev team, I am sure they are doing their best, blockchains are difficult systems to deal with.) We now understand why we do not have SMT's implemented yet. They are unable to deploy such a system within a reasonable time-frame, without there being so many bugs that would crash Steem.
How important is this?
Long term it is hard to say how important this realization is for us who are investors. It may just be a speed bump along Steem's path toward long-term success. I hope that this is what it is.
At worst, this is now a systemic problem the Steem blockchain is now married to. Bad development that cannot deliver what the community wants.
In my viewpoint, what we are seeing is a fundamental event, affecting our investment perspective of the viability of the Steem blockchain long-term. It is uncertain how important this event is.
Witnesses are our Governance
Witnesses need to take note of this event. I am not saying it's so bad, let's all turn on Steemit Inc. I'm sure they are doing their best and they can improve.
The key is, do they improve going forward? This is important because if this is a long-term problem, the only way to ultimately save the viability of this project will be a witness-led path forward to solving the issues we are facing.
Probably a better investment now because of its low price. I feel for the suckers who bought in it when it was much higher, and many folks did.
This is probably true. Often in blockchain, when projects are at their lowest and having issues, it's often the best time to buy just for that reason.
I agree. I invested when it was 4$ and now I am slowly accumulating more. I don’t know if the price will go down further before it starts going up, but I am saving some cash for new lows. I may ultimately lose all my investment if this project fails but downward price averaging on drops is I think a sound strategy to lower my basis.
Didn't realise you were a programmer too, but yes - you are spot on.
I don't think there is a way to sugar coat this. You have to admit there is a problem before there is any hope to fix it and I am seeing a lot of denial and defence from the cheer squad. This is my biggest concern.
If this Knight remembers correctly Ted - Dan had left before HF 19 took place.
I don't get what all the fuss is about - nothing great ever came easy and the changes are for the better. There will be plenty more setbacks before we go mainstream.
You are right SMTs are the future and the developers were right - you can't run infinite transactions on the system so they need an assigned value - and with this the value of SP grows.
SK.
Posted using Partiko Android
Investing depends on having a perspective based on what is actually occurring, not sentiments or preference born from things other than this.
So telling it like it is, is important. That said, I'd give it better than 50% that this ultimately does not matter. However, we could also say that it has already mattered. The reasons SMT's have not launched yet, is visible in this poor update with HF20.
From what I remember Dan may have still been consulting with Steem even though he had left. I'm not totally sure. He was still helping patch Bitshares in the last 12 months because he was talking about helping them on the side. If this was the case with Steem's prior update, makes sense, but you may be right, may have not been the case. Either way, it was smoother last time.
I can't speak of the technical side because I am not a technical person but I completely agree with your (non) investment thesis here.
I don't think Steem will ever reach mass (or even decent) adoption because:
I've been powering down for a few weeks now and I intend on cashing out and keeping just enough SP to being able to post and stuff but I sure won't put my money into this project.
Steem never required mass adoption for the crypto to succeed, it still doesn't. These were all points people like to talk about and dream about, but I never found them relevant to what Steem can actually deliver to us for value.
SMT's are/were the solution to SP conglomeration, people just build an alt-community on a different SMT and find a website which governs according to the SMT, not Steem. People would just need the bare minimum SP to transact on blockchain, but rewards would be tied to the SMT.
You have put on the table a very important point. Are they really able to launch an SMT protocol?
Posted using Partiko iOS
That's a really good question.
Posted using Partiko Android
Well always a supporter of this blockchain but after seeing the HF 20 and the problems and patches after patches being updated in few hours SMT will be really crucial if that doesn't work like they should that would be a drastic fail its already too much late
Thank you for putting your perspective down here. It helped me to look at this event from more of an investor viewpoint. I have definitely questioned steems legitamacy before and this is yet another time to analyze the platform. Is it a scam? No I don't think so. Is it controlled by mafia type figures? Maybe.
Posted using Partiko Android
No doubt that this has impacted the perceived value in the short term. However, it has also led to others analyzing what the changes mean to the bandwidth users across the ecosystem. I think that as time passes, we will be able to consider the real cost of transacting in the ecosystem which will help scale appropriately relative to the way users engage. I have noticed much less spam now and that is a helped the feed!
I upvoted your post.
Cheers to you.
@Pinoy
Posted using https://Steeming.com condenser site.
believe them