Well, I can't disagree with your assessment, because I knew next to nothing about blockchain, bitcoin, or any of the technical side, except for blogging, which I am fairly adept at. However, I do take umbrage at the thought that someone such as myself, investing as I do, 4 to6 hours a day on this platform and in promoting it and placing my content (I am a professional writer, so these are my assets) in its keeping. That's far from not having any skin in the game. Truth be told, I don't have extra cash to invest most times, since I have a large family and choose to be self employed to give them my time, rather than material assets. We do fine, I'm not looking for pity, but true sweat equity is what you used to earn your initial stake and here In am earning mine.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
First of all, thanks for expanding my english vocabulary! I had to look up "taking umbrage". That was not my goal, but I can't be blamed if you chose to feel addressed, so right now I have a hard time feeling sorry. I don't even know you, have never talked to you, so I have no idea why you think I had you in mind when I said that. Please don't take umbrage again (not for me, but because it does no good to yourself), but I am an investment pro and I know a thing or two about behavioral finance and the way people think-feel when money is involved. To me many reactions to my concerns look very much like cognitive dissonance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
That being said, well, I spend as much time as you do on Steemit, at times even much more. Not only writing, but also building the community, being in the chats etc. I stubbornly write a lot in German for instance, well knowing that it's not being rewarded. So it's not like I'm just throwing money at it.
But what's your take on the question I raised? Who do you think is actually buying the work you produce? Would you be as happy if you just got liquid Steem and it was worth only pennies?
You've raised an important question, and I didn't just mean me in particular, I just don't see why sweat equity should be seen as any less valuable than cash investment. I've only been here a month, so I am sure there are many that put in a lot before it was paying out anything. My understanding of crypto is in its infancy, unless you are suggesting that the platform is buying back all of the SBD leaving the site, and not speculators, then I don't understand exactly what the question is. From my view, all currencies are based on agreement as to their value. When people stop agreeing, the currency loses value and can even pass from existence. It hasn't happened in the US in my lifetime, but does happen in other countries with frightening frequency. As an online writer for over six years, I also know the real value of such a large depository of quality content, if used correctly, for driving traffic, which can be monetized in a number of ways. So, perhaps you could educate me?
I'll make an extreme example: Someone could put hours and hours into building a black-and-white TV. Is anyone going to buy that? It reminds of the "Labor theory of value" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
The interesting thing is, that I could argue, that the money I have to invest is the expression of previously done labor, which actually found someone who wanted to pay for it.
Back to Steemit: "value" is subjective (hence "Subjective Proof of Work Algorithm"). If you are here one month, you've noticed the rewards diminishing. Why is that? Has your work become less valuable? No. It's the Steem price that has declined. Why? Because there are not many incentives to put "former work" (=money in the form of BTC) into it. Will that trend change? Maybe, but that's exactly why I wrote this article, because the incentives are low right now.
You are right (imho) when it comes the subjectivity of the "value" of currencies. There is no real reason why Gold is more expensive than Platinum, other than the tacid agreement of "the market" that Gold is Money and Platinum is an industrial commodity. Maybe that could change and the World Platinum Council has been working marketingwise for years to make it at least be considere "jewelry" (with decent success). As for Gold: nobody (imho) can give a reasonable answer of where the price in USD should be. I always say, that I'm only very confident it will stay more expensive than dust, as it did in the last 4000 years (it might not sound very sexy, but you`ll have a hard time finding any particular (!) asset that can say that. You might say "stocks", but which one? The Dow Jones of today has nothing to do with the one started. Most of the companies in the original Dow are dead, so it's misleading).
Now enters Steem, which is designed more like Copper (not scarce, easy to find etc). So you need heavy incentives to actually find people to buy Steem with USD or BTC or whatever. Only that gives Steem the price I talked about earlier and that is the "value" you see below your posts.
Bitcoin has an easy "story" to sell: digital Gold. It took quite a while, but now we might have a couple of million people in the world believing it will stay more expensive than dust. You don't have that with Steem (which is backing SP and SBD!!!). Speculators only buy copper if they think someone will need it for whatever copper is needed for in the future. So what will people NEED Steem for in the future? There are possible answers. But the point of my article is precisely to point to the fact, that imho this aspect is underdiscussed and this whole discussion of the article actually proves my point, because I have yet to get an answer.
I hope that made sense (and again, sorry for my english, no native speaker).
PS: What are all the comments I made here "worth"? Is it "valuable" that I ask questions I consider crucial for the survival of the network, even when in general people don't really like to think about it and instead prefer hoping? I don't know. But I don't get what I'm used to get when I do financial consulting. Still, it was a lot of "work".